Why, hello, hello! Welcome back!
Let's start small this week by doing some easy math reflecting.
In an article on MSN featured this past Tuesday, stats experts listed the US minimum wages and some common costs of living for every decade from the 1950s to today. The tongue-in-cheek slide show -- complete with stereotype-depicting pictures from each era -- fed us some interesting numbers. But it was more in the spirit of inspiring nostalgia rather than relating any truth. Here at This Week In Crazy, we want to take a look at the bigger picture.
With a little help from the fabulous and meticulous thepeoplehistory.com to find the house price averages that MSN missed, here's a quick recap. (Note the translation of money into working time. Kudos, MSN. Clever yardstick.)
Ok, whew. So we have the math. Now for the part where we think.
Let's take the rent situation and chew on that for a second.
If you are working minimum wage, you probably know how hard it is to actually get 40 hours every week in shifts. But let's say for the sake of argument that you do (you poor bastard).
40 hours a week, 4 weeks a month, makes 160 hours you work in a month. Now remember DFUS! "Don't Forget Uncle Sam." He wants One Third of your paycheck. Before you even see your fundage, you're hit with State Tax, Federal Tax, Social Security, and other FICA-ish related expenses (depending on where you live). Which means, you get to KEEP only 160 * (2/3) = 106.67 hours of your full time job earnings.
Let's go back to 1950. If you have 106.67 hours of pay, and rent costs 56 hours of that pay at minimum wage, can you make rent? That's right, class! You CAN make rent AND eat! You even (*gasp!*) have money left over! That's WORKING MINIMUM WAGE!
Now time machine your ass back to today. If rent averages now are 119 hours, and you only have 106.67 hours earned to call your very own, can you make rent? Altogether now! NOPE! And forget about eating or clothing or insurance of any kind.
You might say now, "Wait a sec, folks who earn minimum age might be below the poverty level." And I say, sure. But the poverty level in 2010 was $10,830 (as presented on aspe.hhs.gov). When you file taxes, that number goes up if you have dependents. But if you assume we're talking about a single person with no kids, and you calculate that full time minimum wage workers will earn $15,080 in a year, that means you will NOT get to be exempt from paying taxes.
Makes you want to cry, doesn't it?
So you must be asking yourself, "So, wait, let's get this straight: Minimum wage schlubs in 1950 could work LESS THAN HALF the hours needed today to make rent?" And I answer, "Yuh-huh."
Yaaaaaaaay! What did we win?
Uhm.
Hell if I know.
For extra credit, take another peek at the number of hours you'd need to BUY a house. Note how in 1950, you - the minimum wage worker - would need to work ONE THIRD of the time you'd need today to earn house-buying cheese. If you feel so inclined, note which two decades have the worst house-to-hour ratios. Ask yourself, who was president then?
Thaaaaaaat's right. You just let that sink in. I'm not naming names, but my middle fingers are suddenly itchy for some reason.
So ok, now what? Well, sadly, we here at This Week In Crazy don't really have an answer for you. Keep working, build that resume, do better than minimum wage, and realize that it ain't what it used to be.
There was a time in this country when if you worked hard, even at minimum wage, you could earn a piece of the American Dream. That reality definitely only exists in history books now. As a footnote, right along side these numbers. Until more people learn to do this kind of math, we're kind of stuck in this crazy reality together.
Thanks for tuning in! Thanks to MSN for posting the interesting read in the first place. And remember folks: the sun will always be there, yes that IS what she said, and don't forget to floss!
Until Next Week!