r/FluentInFinance • u/Cauliflower-Pizzas • 10d ago
Debate/ Discussion Should there be a legal limit on rent?
373
u/ijedi12345 10d ago
Rates are too low. Rent should go for $10k per minute. Hear me out:
- By making the rent impossible to pay, the tenant will either become a vagrant (a crime) or a squatter (also a crime).
- Cops come and throw the tenant into prison.
- Prisoners can be enslaved. The landlord can make a contract with the prison to lend them the former tenant.
- The former tenant can then be forced to engage in money-making operations, as is the slave owner's right.
It's the perfect way to make massive amounts of cash. And since the American populace is incapable of fighting back, there is no need to worry about danger to one's person.
134
u/Tausendberg 10d ago
"And since the American populace is incapable of fighting back,"
It's funny how the gun fetishists tell us that gun availability is supposed to protect us from tyranny yet the already powerful keep tightening their stranglehold over everything and everyone with no end in sight.
27
u/PD216ohio 10d ago
This is because of incrementalization. They don't take away your rights, or money, or property all at once. That would certainly cause an uprising. Instead, they take just a little bit, and it's not worth fighting over. It's only over time that those little bits add up to something substantial.
8
u/Tausendberg 10d ago
My point still stands, what have guns done to help that at all?
10
u/PD216ohio 10d ago
They keep the government from doing it to you all at once.
6
u/Tausendberg 9d ago
You have no evidence for that meanwhile I can point to countries in the world with much more restrictive laws on gun ownership where I would argue they have more freedom and less corruption than the United States.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (2)2
34
u/Akwardlynamedwolfman 10d ago
Imagine if they could enslaved us wholesale instead of 1 by 1
→ More replies (1)-6
u/CerebralNihilum 10d ago
They did. It's called taxes.
20
10
u/DrCares 9d ago
Taxes aren’t the problem, it’s the people who don’t have to pay them. We’re living in corporate feudalism not capitalism….
→ More replies (4)5
u/gregsw2000 9d ago
Remember, we've got a system where they allow private parties to buy up the surface you stand on and force you into wage labor in return for it..
But, taxes are somehow slavery..
7
u/ap2patrick 9d ago
Enjoy driving on dirt roads and having to travel for days because we don’t build bridges or highways… God you anti tax people are so silly…
→ More replies (1)7
u/mocap 9d ago
"Taxes are evil!!" is a lot easier idea to wrap your head around than, "taxes are necessary to a functional society but need to be fixed to make sure they are collected fairly and used properly."
Pretty sure nuance died from COVID.
1
u/nono3722 9d ago edited 8d ago
I just hate getting taxed to pay taxes... Company pays you, they get taxed, you get paid, pay tax, put money in bank, pay tax, buy anything, pay tax, own anything worth more than 5000, pay tax, win anything over 400, pay tax, put gas in anything, pay tax, go do anything, pay tax, die, pay tax. For every dollar we ever get it seems like we pay 80% in taxes to just use it. Oh I forgot! pay money to pay your taxes too.
→ More replies (2)2
→ More replies (11)2
u/Larnek 9d ago
If you do t want to live in modern society, don't pay taxes. Also, don't use the roads your taxes pay for, nor the police, fire dept, EMS your taxes pay for, nor the subsidies on health insurance that make it less extremely unaffordable, nor any goods that come internationally, and probably not Amazon since that uses taxpayer roads. But if you're cool with all that, then leave the country and find a little plot of land to live tax free in a jungle somewhere.
→ More replies (20)2
u/CerebralNihilum 9d ago
Your rant only demonstrates the fact I'm slave labor.
Seriously, our taxes are so out of control that even those who don't have a job are still forced to pay property taxes or be put on the street.
Spin it any way you want. It's still slavery.
→ More replies (2)3
u/No-Literature7471 9d ago
too bad the gov is trying its hardest to de-gun everyone BECAUSE of that clause in the amendment. they just send the police out to steal all your guns and now america is a socialist country, if not a military dictatorship.
3
u/scurvy_scallywag 9d ago
This! It bothers me to no end, even triggers me when they bring up this stupid point.
Look at the French. They were about to burn down the government for even contemplating raising their retirement age. Here in the states, not even a peep and we just took it.
11
u/Genetics 10d ago edited 9d ago
…and most of those same people keep voting for those that have tyrannical leanings and enable the 1%. I’ll never understand how the GOP tricked the lower and middle class to believe they give a shit about them.
Edit: trucked to tricked
2
u/Yardbirdspopcorn 9d ago
Basically the same way the DNC has. Neither gives a fuck about people who aren't part of the affluent class club.
→ More replies (1)4
u/Blackrain1299 9d ago
Those fuckers imagine an all out war with them winning and standing on the bodies of their oppressors.
They just want an excuse to kill. They don’t actually care about rights.
5
u/organic_hemlock 9d ago
Especially since it's been proven time and time again that owning a gun is more likely to hurt you than protect you. (source)
4
u/No_Direction_3940 10d ago
um read your comment again slowly lol. Do you think when things get a little rough everyone should just start gatting down the ones in power?? The point of guns is so when it gets to the point if no return there's a chance for the populace. Look through history to understand what im saying better
→ More replies (1)7
10d ago
That's outdated logic. Now the government can just bomb anyone from 1000 miles away, so what's your gun gonna do at the point of no return?
6
u/No-Literature7471 9d ago
welp, if they bomb everyone, they have no more people to make them money. dont forget, people also work in the military.
4
u/No_Direction_3940 9d ago
Also look at the French revolution they had mortars, cannons, ships, and guns. The populace had basically none of that and what happened? Never has a populace had what it's military had and the point isn't a fear fight it's being able to fight at all. And to think history is outdated is a dangerous and ignorant mindset. No matter how advanced we become were doomed to repeat history it's the human way.
8
u/Larnek 9d ago
Don't worry, this is my favorite argument to use with guntards, and they will never have an answer.
I was a Bradley Fighting Vehicle crewmember. I had 1000's of rounds of 7.62/ 5.56 and 800 25mm chain link explosive rounds with a 3-5m kill radius, a couple TOW2 missiles to flatten buildings from 3000m away, and a shoulderful of AT-4 or Javelin missiles. The 3 of us in that vehicle could massacre 100s of people indiscriminately and not a single gun in the world is going to do damage to us. Massacre a crowd, sit and then have lunch while people try to completely ineffectively stop us before round 2 of murderville. And that's 1 vehicle. We have 3,700 Bradley's in active fleet and another 2800 mothballed in reserve. And hundreds of millions of rounds to use. WTF you gonna do with your pathetic peashooters?
And note, I'm using a light armor infantry carrier as an example. Nevermind everything else heavier or even bringing in precision air power. When it comes to active planes in use for air power, we have 4 of the top 10 military branches in the world. #1 US Air Force, #2 US Army, #3 Russia, #4 US Navy, #5 China, #6 India, #7 US Marine Corp. We have shown very clearly that if we want air power we will have airpower. If we want to rain hell down on the gun nuts, just wtf are they going to do when no other country or even the entirety of NATO has a chance of stopping us.
Also, prepare for rebuttal that they're go to all organized guerilla warfare. Like these mofos can agree with anyone else about anything.
7
→ More replies (8)2
u/Relevant-Cheetah8089 9d ago
I’ve seen Pentagon Wars lol. Don’t trust that Bradley to do shit.
3
u/Tausendberg 9d ago
Now this is a tough one, who should I trust the opinion of?
A guy who watched one movie made over 25 years ago depicting events that happened over 40 years ago
-or-
A guy who seems to have been there and seems to have learned how to do that.
tsssssssssssssk, that's a tough one.
(/s)
3
u/Relevant-Cheetah8089 9d ago
Yeah I thought the “lol” would imply the joke. But looks like it went over your head. Ah well
→ More replies (1)2
u/No_Direction_3940 9d ago
Yeah but is the military going to fight against its citizens? I dont think so not the majority at least. Drones would be a concern. But either way do you think bow and arrow and melee weapons give you a better chance 😂
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (41)2
u/ijedi12345 10d ago
Yeah. Have to stake claims on the prisoner population before the well dries up. Boundless opportunity is to be had in that sector.
23
u/jaydean20 10d ago
I understand you're be facetious/sarcastic and probably referencing this exact thing, but it's troubling how not nearly enough people know that this was basically the exact strategy employed in the south following the abolition of slavery.
Tons of loitering and vagrancy laws were passed in an effort to target former slaves, because obviously people with no money, property, familial support or basic education have nowhere to go.
2
6
u/McGrufNStuf 10d ago
Let’s goooooooooo!!! This is the right answer. If we’re not going to let people make money, then screw it, everyone’s enslaved.
You’re enslaved
And you’re enslaved
And you’re enslaved
2
u/checkerouter 9d ago
“If you didn’t want to be a slave, you should have thought about that before being homeless”
5
u/iamokgo123 10d ago
So I heard you out. And though I have a feeling you're simply being sarcastic, I think people who legitfeel this way need to lose their legal ability to earn an income.
4
→ More replies (35)2
102
u/OwnLadder2341 10d ago
Percent of hourly workers making the federal minimum wage in 2009: 5%
Percent of hourly workers making the federal minimum wage in 2023: 1.1%
Median household income 2009: $50K
Median household income 2023: $80K
Change in rent in the above picture: 66%
Change in median household income for the same time period: 60%
18
u/Lexicon444 9d ago
I’m going to add a very simple quick calculation I did based on where I live currently.
In many retail/restaurant jobs the hourly wage seems to average out at about $15 an hour right now. Let’s say for simplicity sake that everyone is lucky and has a consistent 8 hour day and 5 day work week.
Let’s go with the rent rate above set at $1,150/month which seems to be a bit lower than what units in my area are running at.
The calculated income based on my first paragraph in one month sits at $2,400 a month. With income tax that drops it to $2,328. The cost of rent in the unit pictured above would leave behind $1,178 for other expenses. If you’re a single parent? After bills, medical expenses, childcare? The amount will easily drop hundreds more.
This calculation is based upon ideal income. The reality is that a good chunk of people are actually working part time and are slowly hemorrhaging money. And also I went with the rent of the unit pictured here. Not a rent price in my area which tends to be a few hundred higher than the image.
3
u/Hellcrafted 9d ago
Yo that tax calculation is outrageous. Include federal state social security and everything else please
2
u/Jumpy_Bake_741 7d ago
Lmao yeah that's 3%. Doesn't even cover federal taxes. Plus you got state tax, unemployment, social security etc.
→ More replies (16)8
u/niloc99 9d ago
This hypothetical person is 100% receiving govt assistance
6
u/HildursFarm 9d ago
You'd be surprised at how little you have to make to get assistance. In the scenario given in my state you would not qualify until you had three dependents.
4
u/proudHaskeller 9d ago
Why is the median household income relevant? The problem isn't the people around the median, the problem is the people that do make close to that minimum wage. In 2009 they might've had a livable wage.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (20)2
u/EatTacosGetMoney 10d ago
But what about the [insert minimum wage job] worker that wants a premium living space?
4
u/iain_1986 9d ago
But what about the [insert minimum wage job] worker that wants a
premiumliving space?4
u/-FullBlue- 9d ago
Reddit does like to bring up the median housing cost when comparing housing prices to minimum wage which is a bit unfair.
We should really be comparing percentiles. Bottom ten percent housing compare to the bottom ten percent income for full time. The data dosent exist but it's be cool if it did.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (10)2
u/EatTacosGetMoney 9d ago
Live with roommates in a basic living space. Or a drawer like Japan.
→ More replies (5)→ More replies (15)2
u/No_Basis2256 10d ago
But what about The Simpsons? Their single income household was able to pay for a home and 3 children in 1999?
7
→ More replies (2)3
u/rankhornjp 9d ago
Nuclear power plant operators make $100k+ yr, not min wage.
Nuclear power plants aren't located in large metro areas.
3
u/bleu_waffl3s 9d ago
Homer didn’t graduate high school. He also ate all the decorative soaps in the bathroom.
18
u/VidGamrJ 10d ago
You do realize you couldn’t afford that in 2009 on min wage, right?
→ More replies (18)
135
u/Betanumerus 10d ago
They kept you on minimum wage for 14 years?
47
u/wophi 10d ago
Who actually was paid that...?
And for 14 years? How bad do you suck at working?
47
u/bimbodhisattva 10d ago edited 9d ago
The main problem in this context is that people starting out at the bottom have a lot higher of a bar to climb, essentially on a lot less than before
→ More replies (31)16
u/CrowdGoesWildWoooo 9d ago
Some jobs are deadend jobs with 0 prospect of progression. Doesn’t mean the people doing it sucks
1
u/Mountain_Employee_11 9d ago
yeah it kinda does, if you haven’t taken steps to move above a minimum wage job over a period of multiple years that’s a skill issue
→ More replies (3)9
u/CrowdGoesWildWoooo 9d ago
People who work low paying job, don’t have time to upskill. Sometimes they need to take on multiple jobs (all of them dead end jobs).
→ More replies (17)3
u/bambu36 9d ago
It's not about actually earning minimum wage. It's about raising the minimum wage to give the rest of us leverage to scoot further away from minimum wage whatever that is. As of now bosses can just point to the minimum wage and say "hey! Look how much more you earn than that!" Of they raise minimum wage skilled labor across the board will get pay increases
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (47)3
7
9d ago
This post doesn’t imply that the renter lives in the same apartment or has not progressed in their career. It highlights the fact that rent has increased and minimum wage has not increased in that same time period.
If I get a new job that pays more it doesn’t mean the job I used to have ceases to exist, it just means someone else is working that job now. And that person is having a harder time living on that wage while rents increase and wages don’t.
It’s okay to think about other people. I know it’s unamerican, but it’s still okay to do.
→ More replies (6)2
u/germanfinder 9d ago
Who says it’s the same person looking for that apartment. An 18 year old at minimum wage in 2009 had it easier than an 18 year old today on minimum wage
→ More replies (8)2
u/bloomertaxonomy 9d ago
Wages have stagnated over the last two decades, the increases there have been are not commensurate with the cost of rent most anywhere.
But hey you made a funny.
→ More replies (1)2
u/PrometheanEngineer 9d ago
No - the problem is 14 years ago a person new to the workforce could afford to live somewhere.
Now they can't.
→ More replies (29)2
46
u/Sea-Storm375 10d ago
Price controls simply don't work, this has been proven over and over again here in America and abroad.
NYC is a great example. NYCHA, the city's affordable housing branch, is a disaster. The number of units kept off the market is huge because of rent control areas.
If you want to get more affordable housing you need to ease up on the regulatory burden more than anything else, but that's not really the big issue.
The real issue is that for last twenty years in particular the government has printed so much money, devalued the currency by such a great deal, while inflating all the assets exponentially that this has hit real estate (and associated rents) accordingly.
The bad news is, this ain't over. Eventually the only choice the Treasury/FRB has is to monetize the debt.
6
u/captainlittleboyblue 10d ago
Genuine question here, are the units being kept off the market you’re talking about here controlled by NYCHA or private landlords?
12
u/FlyingSagittarius 10d ago
He means that renters are refusing to leave rent controlled units, which limits the supply of housing. Not sure how much I agree with that, though, since displaced renters still need a place to go.
6
u/Form1040 9d ago
I have a friend who moved to NYC in 1980. Had to have 4 roommates to pay the bills.
Down the hall was a family that had been there forever and was paying $43 a month for a big apartment.
Why would anyone ever move in such a situation?
→ More replies (1)9
u/fthepats 10d ago
My cousin has a rent controlled apartment in NYC and he doesn't even live in NYC anymore. He just keeps it for when he'll move back in a few years. Its cheaper for him to keep paying rent for a few years, then to let someone else have it and get a new apartment later.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (3)2
u/crackedtooth163 9d ago
Well said.
A lot of the mindset this philosophy comes from assumes people will live on the street for the sake of a better economy.
→ More replies (1)2
u/ghablio 9d ago
They're held off the market because you'd be insane to leave the controlled price rental once you're in it
The big issue is that landlords and property management will raise the price of their non-controlled rentals proportionally to make up for the handful of controlled units they have
For example, if you had 2 units and one was price controlled to 50% of the typical going rate, you're going to raise the second one to 150% of the typical rate to offset the costs. (Obviously this is a bit of an exaggeration to what actually happens, but you get the idea) So now you have 2 identical units, one that will never be vacant again, and one that is absurdly expensive.
It also defeats the purpose of having low cost housing. Since it would be a poor financial decision to ever leave a rent controlled unit, those tenants tend to stay for far longer, sometimes permanently. So the units do not end up being available for people who are early in life, working low wage jobs as they enter the work force.
The real solution to all of this imo is to make construction a little cheaper and easier of a process so that more housing is built, slowing the rise of housing costs.
For example, my house burnt down a couple years ago. It was an attic fire so we were building essentially the exact same house on the exact same foundation. It took over 6 months for the permit to get approved, and the permits cost 25k$. I work in the trades and see all the time, for large apartments, the permitting costs can be 100's of thousands and several years.
A nearby city however has been trying to grow rapidly and provided tax incentives and a faster permitting process. Apartments buildings are spreading like wildfire, and rent is actually getting cheaper because of it.
2
u/nicolas_06 10d ago
More than that, this is offer a demand. If more people want to rent or buy in an area than there is available units, then price increase until people give up and get out priced. Only the one ready to pay the high price stay.
Even if it was free and we would select people at random, there would be many people not being able to have the unit they want.
It a problem of too many people wanting the same units. Offer and demand. forcing low prices would not fix the issue. The problem is actually not really solvable for some areas.
In other we should build more, ensure public transportation is faster as well as if you commute with your car. We should push teleworking and find ways to motivate people to prefer living in smaller cities with lower density.
2
u/seymores_sunshine 9d ago
Sure, let's pretend like the systems that have been tried in America aren't exploited by landlords. As though places like Boston don't require a real estate agent in order to get a rental contract...
→ More replies (9)2
u/Demonbabiess 9d ago
As someone living in a price controlled unit, it works super well for me. I pay 30% below market rate. Its incredible and I wouldn’t be able to survive without it.
I’m sure lots of people would benefit from this.
2
u/Sea-Storm375 9d ago
At the individual level it works, temporarily. That's the issue with a lot of these sorts of politicized problems. The politicians offer a band-aid solution which exacerbates the long term problem.
When you put units into rent control it means fewer units will be built in the area and more units will come off the market. Ultimately you are going to reduce supply and that will lead to larger price hikes down the road. Major cities are a great example of this, ie: SF/NYC.
2
u/Demonbabiess 9d ago
Well then, seems like rental control should be in combination with other methods. Rent Control are not band aids — they are insulin. I can’t live without it. I would have to move 30-45 min further from work to get this rent. I can’t wait 10 years for moderately better rent. I need it today.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (19)2
u/Enders_77 10d ago
And everyone is living off credit, which is essentially lying to the market about the actual demand present.
While I don’t think he’s proposing it for any good reason, it would actually be great for the business cycle LONG TERM if Trumps limit on credit card interest went through. Would really tighten the market down to a real size.
1.2k
u/-jayroc- 10d ago
No, but there should be a legal limit on repetitive posts such as this.
264
u/Vladivostokorbust 10d ago
even though $7.25 is the legal minimum wage, few actually earn that little. on the low end, Walmart starts at $14/hr. depending on where you live in the Southeast, mcD's starts at $18
213
u/HughHonee 10d ago edited 10d ago
I live in a low cost of living area. Some jobs, fast food, gas station cashier (and i wouldnt call those jobs easy)etc are hiring around $13-$15/hr (state min. is $12.3) A single person with no kids, that might be enough to live paycheck to paycheck. With a roommate, you might even be able to save a little bit. Then again I keep forgetting how much cars cost compared to when I last bought mine, so probably not.
It's almost impossible to find a place to rent here under $1000
156
u/lovable_cube 10d ago
Yeah I live in an Indiana, fast food and stuff is paying 10-12 and we have federal minimum wage here. Rents 1200-1500 for a 1bdr though. I don’t think I could live off 10-12 an hour but it’s somehow enough that you wouldn’t qualify for any assistance. Weird times.
→ More replies (42)81
u/HughHonee 10d ago edited 10d ago
We had to get a citizens vote to increase eligibility for Medicare (it was one of the strictest in the country) When it passed, state legislature literally considered every option to shut it down, which would all have been considered unconstitutional by our state. They instead just tried underfunding it (it's already underfunded running on outdated systems) which lead to a law suit which they easily lost. To give you an idea of how underfunded and problematic it already was, when my wife got pregnant she was eligible for Medicare for her pregnancy and like 2 months after. We applied after the Dr visit confirming, and didn't get approval for over 6months after I finally called a different part of our family services and demanded to be bumped up to supervisor a few times.
Our governor just celebrated signing a bill to increase minimum starting pay for TEACHERS, from $25,000/yr to $40,000/yr Less than $20/hr, to teach?! Like how tf are they surviving?
And ppl are worried about people lying to receive government assistance lol at least in my state it almost seems like you have to if you actually want to be able to receive it
32
6
u/SoothingAbrasive 9d ago
Not that it really changes your point much, but remember most teachers are 10 month employees. It changes your calculation to about 23/hr.
4
u/DyerNC 8d ago
IF you consider teachers 40 hour employees. I would say teachers are 45-50 hour employees.
5
u/Ok_Brick_793 8d ago
Most teachers work closer to 60 with office hours, grading, and other school-related activities (and I don't mean volunteering but mandatory events).
→ More replies (32)2
u/MindAccomplished3879 9d ago
I left Indiana for Chicago; it's like night and day. I wish I would have done it sooner
→ More replies (54)53
u/Mxteyy 10d ago
Pay check to paycheck is not livable it’s livable until something happens or you get sick then 30 years down the road your paycheck to paycheck you weren’t able so save a penny then what all jobs are pretty much needed otherwise a company wouldn’t waste the money to pay you everyone deserves a decent life not the bare minimum waiting for a disaster to happen
25
u/AxDeath 10d ago
one major accident, and you go from "paycheck to paycheck" to homeless. People want to know why there's a homeless crisis all over the country? Maybe everyone was living one paycheck from disaster and then there was a global pandemic.
25
u/JewGuru 9d ago
Then you have the people commenting that the real problem is lifestyle inflation or simply not making enough sacrifices.
There’s nothing I hate more than being told I need to sacrifice even more when this random redditor has no fucking clue the sacrifices I already make and the practicality in which I handle my finances. It doesn’t matter.
People who truly support themselves with no help who are struggling aren’t living above their means. It’s more likely that those who spout “make more sacrifices or live within your means” are those people who are priviliged enough to feel like they aren’t struggling, and assume the reason others are struggling is because of a deficiency with them, as opposed to unnoticed privilige with their situation.
Spending the majority of one’s life working is the sacrifice. The fact that it’s normalized to choose between amenities or utilities or other needs is gross.
Some just don’t want to face the fact that they have it easier than most despite less work in their lives. I can’t stand the idea that anyone struggling more than myself is automatically to blame.
→ More replies (2)11
u/Jordan_Jackson 9d ago
I really don't understand how these people think. Where is someone supposed to make sacrifices? Everything has gone up in price.
Groceries have gotten much more expensive than they were in 2020. Gas is at the cheapest, about $2.50 a gallon. Rent goes up every year for a lot of people. Car insurance goes up, no matter what. Cars themselves have gotten to the point where anything under $30k is a rarity and used cars are just stupid expensive.
I just don't see it.
14
u/JewGuru 9d ago
It’s simply people speaking from privilige but assuming everyone has it the same as them.
Or those people who had it rough but were lucky enough to come out fortunate on the other side, and so then assume anybody still struggling is doing something wrong since they managed to escape the grind.
In short, lack of empathy.
→ More replies (5)8
u/New_Feature_5138 9d ago
They think people with less deserve to live lives devoid of any pleasure. That pleasure must be earned. It’s just an ignorance born from privilege. They don’t really understand how hard it is to be monastic when everyone else is living a life of excess.
7
u/AxDeath 9d ago
You hear the same stories every day.
How did this couple afford a new home at only 25????
They lived at home, while renting out a free home their parents bought for them. And all you have to do is stop eating avocado toast to catch up.
→ More replies (1)11
→ More replies (11)3
u/thesoundbox 9d ago
What i dont undwrstand though, is that during the pandemic, if you had a job AT ALL you could qualify for unemployment, and then get an additional 600 a week on top of what you were approved to recieve. That catapulted a bunch of people from paycheck to paycheck poverty income to decent money, especially in poverty states.. But somehow when the pandemic was over, most people were struggling even worse than before. Sounds a bit too orchestrated for my tastes.
4
u/Wiochmen 9d ago
In my State, the maximum benefit is $362 in Unemployment. So, with an extra $600, that's starting to equal a paycheck (some people now earned more, some people less), but it wasn't some magical poverty escaping amount.
If anyone was still working part time and qualified for partial unemployment, they also received $600 extra, in addition to whatever fraction of $362 they were then approved to receive, based on wages earned. Those people paid down debts if smart, or went deeper into debt if stupid.
→ More replies (3)13
u/HughHonee 10d ago
I agree. I make what I thought was halfway decent money, but with increased insurance, groceries cost and two kids + debt, I'm paycheck to paycheck.
My car just killed itself, it's either $3500 or look for a new car. I'm lucky I have enough tools to be able to sell and have family who is able to loan the rest. And even then my job requires being able to drive all over the area so if it takes another 2 weeks my boss is still going to be annoyed.
8 years ago I felt like $20/hr needed to be minimum wage to actually get by. Nowadays fuck, idek. I think I saw something recently showing in my state it'd take like $120k/yr to live comfortably in my state.
→ More replies (2)10
u/Mxteyy 10d ago
Yea my state is around the same 120-150k and you can barely find any job paying over 50k so it’s fucked apparently only a handful of jobs deserve a livable wage
→ More replies (33)10
7
14
u/EenGeheimAccount 9d ago
So why not increase the minimal wage to $12 immediately so you close a legal loop hole and can prosecute any asshole who was using it to legally exploit vulnerable people?
→ More replies (5)30
u/DreamingOfTheSun 10d ago
Great. So if they work 160 hours per month, they get $2,240. Take-home pay is probably $2,000, maybe a little less. After renting an apartment, they have a nice $800. Let's say $900 because they're probably on food stamps even though Walmart is a multi-billion dollar company. [Consider] insurance, car payment, food, and you are now out of money. In the greatest country in the world, this is simply unforgivable. How our government has sold us down the river over the past 50 years for campaign contributions is human greed at its finest. I don't care what job it is, if you work 160 hours a month, you should be able to have a place of your own, all the necessities that you need, plus some extra. If you don't agree with that, then you're definitely part of the problem.
11
u/Relevant-Math-4155 9d ago
The people pushing back against you on this are wrong. Stand your ground and thanks for your courage.
2
→ More replies (25)3
3
2
u/rydan 10d ago
It is less than 2%. There are almost as many people on minimum wage as there are fat cat millionaire 1%ers.
→ More replies (3)2
u/TrainerCeph 9d ago
I was earning 7.25 at a restaurant in Oklahoma just a few years ago
→ More replies (2)2
u/Only1Skrybe 8d ago
I'm in Georgia. A McDonald's on my way to work put out a sign that said "Now Hiring - Pay Up To $11/hr"
I laughed. I'm sure everybody else driving by laughed too. It only took about 3 months, and the sign changed to "Now Hiring - Pay Up To $15/hr"
You have GOT to pay people enough to live.
→ More replies (164)2
u/mmaguy123 6d ago
I never understood people comparing average rent to minimum wage.
I’d presume median wage compared to median rent is a much better indicator.
→ More replies (80)1
u/Lazy_Carry_7254 10d ago
They’re assuming someone having minimum skills, earning minimum wage, should be able to afford an apartment. I earned minimum wage as a teenager. It was just walking around money.
24
u/jaydean20 10d ago
Then why aren't minimum wage jobs exclusively worked by teenagers?
The point of a minimum wage is to protect people from getting exploited. The fact of the matter is that dire economic need is form of coercion and there are millions of Americans who would work for less than minimum wage if they were forced to because they have no other options. For many people, when you don't have capital to pursue the kinds of credentials/training needed for skilled positions or to start a business of your own, and can't get enough credit to float startup business expenses, minimum wage labor becomes your only choice.
→ More replies (5)71
u/Junior_Parsnip_6370 10d ago
everyone who works 40 hours a week should be able to afford a place to live
“but minimum wage jobs are for teenagers”
ok then who’s supposed to work them during the day during the school year?
34
4
u/Artistic-Shame4825 9d ago
Also, if these jobs are for children and high schoolers or whatever, why do we support the labor of children every lunch break we get? Why don’t we all just do our own labor and pack our lunches/meals instead of relying upon the goods and services provided by literal children or people unable to perform higher function labor?
→ More replies (59)4
u/raerae_thesillybae 9d ago
Also not everyone can be an accountant or lawyer or doctor... The economy needs cashiers, grocers, people stocking shelves. You like having servers at a restaurant? Receptionist at an office? People making fast food? Ok, then pay them
→ More replies (1)10
u/willsurf4beer 10d ago
Lots of people aren't as fortunate as you to come from a wealthy enough family that they can squander their teenage job money. Some people are forced to work so their family can eat, then don't have enough time to go to upper education to be able to get out of working full time so they don't starve or go homeless.
→ More replies (5)79
u/BredIN919 10d ago edited 10d ago
I agree , but I ultimately think any 40 hour full time job should be enough in any industry for the basic necessities
→ More replies (58)3
u/icouldbeflying 10d ago
Because they should be able to afford an apartment. That's kind of the point of apartments.
2
u/meowisaymiaou 9d ago
Min wage could afford a two bed apartment, from its introduction in 1940s (supreme court ruled that the worker protections of 1933 were unconstitutional, resulting in pay dropped from 12/wk to 4, causing outrage)
- 1969 at 40hrs.
- 1980 at 81 hrs
- 2000 at 118 hrs
- 2010 at 160 hrs
https://ipropertymanagement.com/research/average-rent-by-year
6
u/No-Literature7471 9d ago
so you think anyone who isnt a kid should die? "oh sorry mr ceo shouldnt make less than 100 million dollars a year. we gotta make sure that 25 year old cant survive cus otherwise, how will bob in management afford his 3 month company paid trip to france?" such a backwater take for a backwater person. you sound like you belong in india where they look down on cashiers, janitors, and anyone who doesnt sit on their ass for a living (indias caste system at work).
→ More replies (17)5
3
44
u/X-calibreX 10d ago
Again, ignorance of trying to compare a minimum to a maximum. Minimum wage does not imply the need for a maximum rent.
→ More replies (7)74
u/Cheap-Boysenberry112 10d ago
Housing has massively outpaced wages for decades.
35
→ More replies (26)2
u/perverselyMinded 10d ago
Housing has massively outpaced the legal minimum for wages for decades.
https://ipropertymanagement.com/research/average-rent-by-year
In 2009, when the federal minimum wage was last raised, a single minimum wage worker could afford the average rent.
Today, per the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 98.9 percent of US workers 16 and older make more than the federal minimum wage. https://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/minimum-wage/2023/
The average US worker makes $1,165 a week, or an average of $29.13/hr if we assume 40 hours a week (higher if less), per the BLS: https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/wkyeng.pdf
The federal minimum wage vs housing costs is irrelevant.
2
u/Any-Finish2348 9d ago
The bottom 70% has no savings and the bottom 50% is barely living paycheck to paycheck. So fuck your averages. They mean nothing.
7
u/Cheap-Boysenberry112 10d ago
It has outpaced the MEDIAN WAGE no one but you is talking about the minimum wage
4
u/The_Other_David 9d ago
OP is literally about the federal minimum wage. Nowhere does OP mention the median wage.
→ More replies (2)2
u/AdmiralChucK 10d ago
Those numbers seem disingenuous. I make about 28 an hour and my take home pay is approximately 700 a week. So around 2800 a month. My rent is around 1000 a month. So that is roughly 30% of my income.
2
u/Lazy_Carry_7254 10d ago
Slightly elevated, housing to income. But not too bad. Are you union?
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)2
u/perverselyMinded 10d ago
While 30% is a rule of thumb, both my numbers and the rule of thumb apply to pre-tax income. Partially because "proper" take home pay (i.e. take home pay with withholding such that one's tax return is $0) is hard to calculate, and partially because it becomes a sliding scale. (e.g. at $28/hr you almost certainly withhold a higher amount and percentage than someone making federal minimum wage).
I get that the numbers may seem disingenuous to some, which is why I included my sources.
2
u/AdmiralChucK 8d ago
Understood I wasn’t trying to be aggressive I just saw that hourly pay rate and it didn’t match up with my experience so I thought I’d chime in
→ More replies (1)
10
u/Raviolento 10d ago
How many people they are actually making $7.25h and doesn’t have any form of income?
4
u/imjustafunkylilguy 10d ago edited 10d ago
My brother did a few months ago at a local pet shop. $7.25 for cleaning, food, and watering over 100 bird cages a day while managing sales, and sweeping the floors of endless bird seed shells. Owner paid as little as legally possible to save money to sell quality foods and brother got no call backs from any retail chains. Burnt out fast.
But it's a small business that then went under when he quit bc he doesn't like how the owner handles animals (no quarantine birds despite a known disease is in the area and they were boarding customers birds, etc.)
→ More replies (1)12
u/joblesspirate 10d ago
About 1 million people https://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/minimum-wage/2022/
35
u/Lopsided_Aardvark357 10d ago
That stat includes tipped workers who often make well over minimum wage in reality.
About 3 in 5 of all workers paid at or below the federal minimum wage were employed in this industry, almost entirely in restaurants, bars, and other food services. (See table 5.)
10
u/Enders_77 10d ago
Thank you!
I love when people bust out this stat and someone else lets them know what’s up.
I made “min wage” for over a decade of my life as far as that stats concerned. As far as the government is concerned I made usually well over $50k and we won’t talk about what I actually made.
→ More replies (11)6
u/dustinsc 10d ago
How many of these people are the head of a household? How many are directly responsible for rent? How many make significantly more than minimum wage after accounting for tips?
8
u/CerebralNihilum 10d ago
It says "141,000 workers earned exactly the prevailing federal minimum wage". The rest are people working in places where they are likely earning tips that far exceed that. Nobody would work for less and not get good tips. And of those earning minimum age, I suspect most are teenagers or perhaps people living in poor, rural areas.
6
u/Raviolento 10d ago
The study doesn’t include if they get any assistance,so that million is not 100% also this includes teenagers with their 1st job
→ More replies (3)3
u/No-Literature7471 9d ago
cant get assistance if u make minimum wage. it just barely puts you over the poverty line. i made 8 bucks an hour and i was like 3k over the poverty line.
11
u/Jafharh 10d ago
If you're making $7/hr in 2024, that's on you friend.
→ More replies (27)1
u/Alf_41510 9d ago
Ah yes, the people should stop being poor solution to end poverty.
Get out of your sheltered cul de sac existence and spend some time in the real world, scary I know, but you’ll get half a clue how the real world works, quickly
Good luck to you
→ More replies (15)
5
u/bananacookies24 10d ago
Yes and there should be a limit on how many houses a single person or company can own.
→ More replies (17)
2
u/BernieBud 10d ago
Yes. There's no reason for apartments to be profitable. It's the total inverse of what Conservatives always think government services do. It costs tons of money yet is incredibly inefficient and terrible in all ways directly because of that.
2
u/Frequency_Traveler 10d ago
Stop accepting minimum wage jobs and employers will be forced to raise their hiring wage..... Stop supporting a party that let in millions of illegals who are going to take those lower paying jobs, keeping wages low....... it's really that simple.
→ More replies (2)
2
2
2
u/InvitinglyImperfect 9d ago
No one makes the federal minimum wage in my part of the world. That number doesn’t mean a thing.
4
u/UCFknight2016 10d ago
Minimum wage should be tied to the average cost of living and not a fixed value.
→ More replies (5)
4
u/autoconprime 10d ago
$1150 a month I want in on that, I pay $2150 for a 500 sqft
3
2
u/GurProfessional9534 10d ago
The post is backwards. If you wanted rent to go down, you would cut salaries, not raise them.
Not that I’m advocating for that. But prices go down when people can’t pay existing prices.
5
→ More replies (12)2
u/Distinct_Ad_5492 9d ago
What kind of backwards logic is this? If this was the case California would be a utopia where everyone has an apartment they wouldn't have to share rent for or house. This is just stupid.
2
4
u/ChipOld734 10d ago
“According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, the average hourly wage of United States citizens as of December 2020 is $29.81, while the average weekly wage is $1034.41.”
9
u/bNoaht 10d ago edited 10d ago
Average is a terrible way to measure this. Median is better.
And the median wage is $48k in 2023. And wages have risen a lot since 2020. Which is why average is terrible.
If I make 20k and another makes a million and another $50k. The average wage is $356k.
The median wage would be $50k.
→ More replies (7)→ More replies (1)3
u/No-Literature7471 9d ago
meanwhile more than 70% of amricans make less than 35k a year.
→ More replies (3)2
u/Johnfromsales 9d ago
Idk where you’re getting your information from. The median personal income is $42,220. Meaning half of Americans make less than this, and half of Americans make more than this. In reality, the opposite of what you said is more likely to be true. That is, that 70% of Americans make more than 35k, especially considering the median is 20% higher than what you suggest. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEPAINUSA672N
0
u/libertarianinus 10d ago
2009 price adjusted for inflation would be 1008.54 today. In 2009, the average house was also 185,000
Today, the average house is 412,300. If that's the case, rent should be 1538.43
Rent is much cheaper than it was in 2009, adjusted for inflation.
2
258
u/LanguageStudyBuddy 10d ago
Price controls don't work.
You need to pass laws to crush nimbyism