this post was submitted on 01 Feb 2024

1055 points (95.4% liked)

Work Reform

9958 readers

545 users here now

A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.

Our Philosophies:

All workers must be paid a living wage for their labor.
Income inequality is the main cause of lower living standards.
Workers must join together and fight back for what is rightfully theirs.
We must not be divided and conquered. Workers gain the most when they focus on unifying issues.

Our Goals

Higher wages for underpaid workers.
Better worker representation, including but not limited to unions.
Better and fewer working hours.
Stimulating a massive wave of worker organizing in the United States and beyond.
Organizing and supporting political causes and campaigns that put workers first.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

1055

mic drop (lemmy.world)

submitted 9 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

77 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

Average in the US for a 2 bedroom is $1317 per statista.

Triple that for a monthly income = $3951

x12 for annual = $47,412

/2080 for hourly full time = $22.79/hr

A 1 bedroom (or 2br with a $200/mo UBI) at $1100ish brings the minimum to $19ish.

A 2 bedroom but working 60hrs/week or using 50% of income on rent instead of 33% is around $15/hr.

Just trying to play around with the numbers to see what a real political proposal might look like. Feels great to meme a declaration, people start disagreeing when you start putting numbers to it.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 9 months ago

Or put in a way that the conservatives can understand: if a person works full time for a company, the tax payers should not have to subsidize that company by supplying the necessary benefits to bridge the pay gap for basic necessities.

(Unfortunately, their leaders would easily convince them how good an idea it is to give tax dollars back to the corporations, and how it is a social good to humiliate lesser people that don’t deserve full personhood, in order to inspire them to be more valuable resources for their employers)

[–] [email protected] 31 points 9 months ago

the minimum wage should be enough to afford a house...like it was for boomers.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 9 months ago

A two bedroom for minimum wage?! Hmmm suppose that's only ridiculous if you think that little should not be allowed to live inside and ALSO eat for working at what should be a living wage

[–] [email protected] 13 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Either raise the minimum wage or restrict rents to meet it.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 9 months ago

Minimum wage goes up with inflation with a 1932 basis and rent is restricted to 1/3rd of monthly wages at minimum wage with obvious exeptions for students and those on a fixed income for one bedroom apartments.

[–] [email protected] 108 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Say it with me now: Fuck the family income metric!

FUCK THE FAMILY INCOME METRIC!

how many millions of single people/perpetually single people are out there? We're defining the economic health of our population by a metric that demands a dual income. So yes, 2x the typical salary is enough for a person to get by on. 2 people have to share resources to make ends meet.

For someone like myself who is perpetually and indefinitely single, working full time in a psudo-managment position, it's beyond insulting that I'm "forced" to live in people's basements or garages if I want to keep the slightest glimmer of hope of retirement... A "legitimate" apartment would cost the entirety of my income not even the sadly "typical" 3/4ths.

(don't castrate me for the management thing lol. I'm not the coffee holding office whip cracker, I'm working directly along side my team in a factory doing most of the heavy lifting so they don't need to.)

[–] [email protected] 34 points 9 months ago (1 children)

What older folk often forget is that not only could they easily afford a house in the 60s and 70s, but they likely also could on a single income. Many people nowadays are having trouble affording a house on dual incomes.

Housing keeps going up and couples are now having to split them with other couples just to raise a family. My sister and her fiance live in the basement of a house where his brother and sister-in-law live upstairs with a toddler and twins on the way. They won't have enough room soon and can't afford anything larger, and my sister wants to start having kids soon but the basement isn't exactly larger either.

That's one house for 4 working adults and potentially 4 children, when back in the day you could have a full house with 2 adults and 3-4 children on a single income.

My grandpa worked as a landscaper/gardener and was still able to support his stay-at-home wife and 3 children.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

As a fifty year old I would like to point out that I did not officially reach legal age (18) until the 1990's. I am "older". Who you mean are what we colloquially refer to as "old as fuck".

[–] [email protected] 13 points 9 months ago (1 children)

You made me do maths that did NOT yield pleasant results, if you're 50 you must've been born in like 1945 and I won't hear any different!

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

As someone in my early 40s, I can confirm that 50 year olds were born almost 100 years ago. Right? ...right??

load more comments