Yep. At 55 hours, Puerto Rico is really your best option here.
The National Low Income Housing Coalition released the above map, which suggests that Willard Romney’s 47% greatly need extra assistance.
I mean, how could you not seek out food stamps if you have to work 70-some hours just to make rent? Or you work less, but at what cost? Eat McDonald’s everyday because it’s dirt cheap?
Social welfare programs may be the only hope for those looking to rise above their situation.
(sorry the resolution is kinda crappy—go to the Good blog for a high-res version of the above infographic)
This article appears in Nov 8-14, 2012.
MAKE LOCAL JOURNALISM HAPPEN
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
The bigger issue is who thinks you *should* be able to pay the rent by yourself if all you’re willing to do is work at a job that pays minimum wage? At 16-20 minimum wage makes a lot of sense, but at 30? 40?
What choices did you make that led you to the situation where you’re too old to live at home, but only making minimum wage? Did you perhaps decide to drop out of high school? Maybe school was no fun so you decided not to go to college? Couldn’t hold off so you got pregnant before you ever had a chance to make sure you could support yourself? Went to college, but chose a degree with no practical value and so you’re just as unemployable as before you got the degree? Got hooked on video games or alchohol, or some other addiction so that you are so attention deficit you can’t hold down a real job?
Who led you to believe that you wouldn’t have to share a place with 3 other people to make the nut?
So please help me understand James: why should I care? Give me an example (or two or three) of people who made a plan for their life, made the right choices, worked hard, and still can’t do any better than a minimum wage job. Then, please explain why it is appropriate that they shouldn’t have to expect to share a place with multiple people.
I will admit one thing – it really sucks that I see so many parents who are just awful role models. It doesn’t even occur to them to help their kids understand what it takes to make it in life and why they need to shoot a little higher than a minimum wage job.
And finally, what the hell does this have to do with Mitt Romney’s comment about 47% not paying taxes? Or do you just have to jab Romney because it’s easy and the typical TSW reader loves that kind of stuff?
BIG FAT LIE! 40hrs @ Oregon minimum which is $8.80 an hr = $352.00 a week which = $1404 a month. Pretty much any where can you find an aptmnt for that and still have enough to live on.”Once the number of takers becomes greater than the number of producers America will become a trainwreck”!!! Simple math definds the falseness of this socialist article! PLEASE use your heads media Blaaaaaaa!
Honestly, did you really EXPECT the straight scoop from The Source?
The problem with The Source is that they have to play games in a story. It really wrecks a paper’s credibility. 2-bedroom apartments are all over Craigslist at $750-$850/month, which probably means about $500/month split with a room mate, inc. utilities. At $1400/month, virtually no taxes leaves $900 month for other living. Not luxury, but not in “desperate” need of food stamps or “not cutting it”.
Who cares about the truth when you can create your own travesty to sell papers.
Individuals making minimum wage are either going to school and partially supporting themselves, working only to allow them to sustain their preferred activities, lack any useful education or training or are handicapped by mental or physical issues.
With the exception of those handicapped, these people are getting exactly what they have earned and are not entitled to be given more by society so they can live in leisure, contributing little to the society themselves. They feel they are “entitled” because they are here!
The Source does not mentioned that the high school graduation rate in Bend is approximately 73%, an embarrassing figure for any metropolitan area. If those working at the minimum wage would make an effort to become educated or train for some skill that provides a sustaining wage they would find life much more comfortable, even if they have to give some effort to their future and give up the “easy” life.
This country has a shortage of more than 100,000 engineers, 100,000 programmers, 100,000 nurses and an untold number of doctors, to name just a few PROFESSIONS. Those at minimum wage are welcome to fill these jobs if they make the effort and invest in their future,although many will give you any number of excuses why they can’t do this. Unfortunately, they are their own worst enemy!
Well at least we can bring in workers from off-shore on visas, who don’t need food stamps, to fill our needs so we don’t have to inconvenience these people.
Friends: A few well-made points here—thanks for the thoughtful responses.
Please keep in mind, though, as the text above the graphic states, the info given is for a two-bedroom unit. Perhaps this insinuates a single parent? Perhaps a single parent who’s attempting to go back to school, work and care for a sick child?
Certainly there are those who unfairly rely on social welfare programs, put into place to assist those truly in need. Others, however, may need temporary assistance.
It’s always good to keep an open mind.
Cheers and thanks for reading!
Excuse me James…get real.
“Minimum wage ain’t cutting it”
“How could you not seek out food stamps”
“Social welfare program may be the only way out”
Are there a few with difficulties…of course. True for many in all social circles. Sadly, your sensationalist intentions are all too clear. If you want a better social dialogue on the issues, start with honesty in your own shop and lead by example.
When I married decades ago, I was the sole wage earner making one half the median family income – and that was at or very close to minimum wage. We were able to afford a small two-bedroom apartment including all utilities. We were exceedingly poor and got “CARE” packages from my family, but you could just do it.
This points up a reality that folks don’t understand. The average American’s earnings, adjusted for inflation, haven’t improved for decades. And minimum wage has fallen WAY behind inflation. Essentially, the US came out of WWII in great shape, the only major combatant that grew its economy. Through means that were frequently unsavory, the US then controlled half the world’s resources…no wonder the Russians and Chinese got an attitude!
But that meant that, statistically, it was necessarily downhill from there.
So, will things EVER get better? Maybe in the short term. Folks are fed up w/ the increasingly obscene distribution of wealth and the pols will act on that. But mid to long term, machines and software are gunning for our jobs.
With respect Witness, you don’t know what every other person knows, so perhaps you shouldn’t assume what folks do and do not understand. Yes, by some people’s measure, minimum wage hasn’t kept up. The “DemocraticUnderground.com” says it shold be $13/hr. I think that’s high – they’re comparions look off, but let’s suppose it is true. Suppose we force the minimum wage up by that amount? Who’s going to pay? The answer is everyone. Every single thing we all buy will go up to cover it. So then $13/hr won’t be enough, so it will have to go up again, and the cycle will repeat itself. So, how would this resolve itself? You’ll trash the economy because employers will reduce their hiring, and consumers will reduce their consumption. The end result? All the people at the bottom end of the economy will lost their jobs. Want an example? Look at the various economies in southern Europe. They’re living that dream.
Finally, you mention the “obscene distribution of wealth”. What the hell does this have to do with anything? Employers and corporations will pass employment costs on to their customers. Increasing minimum wage won’t affect profit margins significantly. It will affect their revenue, but only because you’re going to trash the economy.
But maybe what you really want to do is raise minimum wage and implement price controls at the same time. Is that what you’d do? Most economists know that’s not a good idea: http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/PriceControls.html
So, since I won’t presume to know what you’re really thinking, please educate me on what you’d advocate.