Paul Campos outlines a really important blindspot in discussions about both the minimum wage and cost of living. Because most people have a very slim grasp of how inflation works, we don't understand how costs and wages change in value over time. We have the example that Campos and other have noted of John Thune saying he did just fine on a $6/HR wage when he was a kid. But $6/HR when he was a teenager is the equivalent of $25/HR today. Is Thune arguing for a $25/HR minimum wage? Of course not. Is he stupid? I don't know. Is he wrong to base his argument against a $15/HR minimum wage on his experience decades ago? Very much so.
My college cost $18,000 a year when I went. It now costs $57,500 a year. I had $6/HR jobs in college and it kept me in enough money to scrape by. There is no way $7/HR could function the same way for a college student today. The idea of living on $7/HR and a 40 hour work week is absurd, and it's based on a flawed perspective on our individual past and the broader understanding of how inflation works in a post-gold standard economy.
It looks as if the "Fight for 15" will die in the Senate, because Joe Manchin is similarly stupid about how much things cost and won't abolish the filibuster (which is stupid for a host of reasons). The Senate Parliamentarian has ruled that a minimum wage increase isn't part of the budgetary process, which is broadly true.
Still, Democrats need to show they understand that a living wage is both popular and a potential huge attack angle against Republicans, but they will have to convince people who made $6/HR when they were kids how the world actually works, and I'm not optimistic.
I'm sure Populist Hero of the People Josh Hawley will help them out.
No comments:
Post a Comment