Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
caulfield12

Hahn is getting all the praise, Theo no longer "Sainted"

Recommended Posts

Minimum wage was established at $0.25 in the FDR era, which is significantly lower when adjusted for inflation than today's federal minimum wage (which we all agree isn't a living wage).

According to CNN, the highest the minimum wage has ever been when adjusted for inflation was less than $12, still not a living wage.

https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2019/business/us-minimum-wage-by-year/index.html

Edited by chitown87

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, chitown87 said:

Not even close to being accurate.

Based on what? The costs of homes and education has escalated significantly since 1970 - even when factoring in inflation - while the minimum wage has not. In 1968, minumum wage was $1.60; that would be worth $11.55 in 2018. The federal minumum wage in 2018? $7.25.

That means, even if home prices and education was the exact same in 1970 (it's not!), you had nearly 150% (this is a middle class figure, the number is closer to 40% for the minimum wage class) more buying power in 1970 than you have today. When you factor in the dramatic escalation of home prices an education, you actually had even more buying power in 1970 than the cited 150%.

Edited by Look at Ray Ray Run
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Based on what? The costs of homes and education has escalated significantly since 1970 - even when factoring in inflation - while the minimum wage has not. In 1968, minumum wage was $1.60; that would be worth $11.55 in 2018. The federal minumum wage in 2018? $7.25.

That means, even if home prices and education was the exact same in 1970 (it's not!), you had nearly 150% more buying power in 1970 than you have today. When you factor in the dramatic escalation of home prices an education, you actually had even more buying power in 1970 than the cited 150%.

Well, $11.55 isn't a living wage so I'm not sure how that makes your point more valid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, chitown87 said:

Minimum wage was established at $0.25 in the FDR era, which is significantly lower when adjusted for inflation than today's federal minimum wage (which we all agree isn't a living wage).

According to CNN, the highest the minimum wage has ever been when adjusted for inflation was less than $12, still not a living wage.

https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2019/business/us-minimum-wage-by-year/index.html

$12/hr in 1970, with the average cost of a home and school was a livable wage.

You could work a full-time summer job, on minimum wage, in 1970 and pay for a hefty portion of 1 years tuition. Today? If you worked a minimum wage job, for 3 months at 40 hours a week, you would net about $2800 which isn't even 10% of the average tuition for one year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, caulfield12 said:

Fake trickle down economics is still not “fake” after over 40 years and multiple trials at the Federal, state and local levels, at least not to roughly 47% of American voters.

But back to the original discussion, lol.

By the way, my apologies for not picking up your sarcasm. I agree with you 100%. We have 40 years of data telling us that this is hurting the middle class and lower class of this country, and yet you have vast amounts of middle and lower class earners agreeing with a system that harms them. It is truly baffling stuff. Every single member in the middle class should be for a substantial increase to the national minimum wage - it is by far the most beneficial thing for their continued growth of wealth.

It's even worse when you consider I have less buying power today than I would have had in 1970, despite the fact that technology has made things easier and should have increased wages based on the sole fact that technology increases efficiencies. 

Good discussion overall; I'll cease here as it's not related to the thread but appreciate the thoughts of others. Everyone thinks they're going to be the next billionaire so they don't understand the fact that billionaires really shouldn't even be a thing. Jeff Bezo's pays his warehouse workers like complete shit - as well as his drivers - while being worth more money than he would ever no what to do with. It's much more beneficial to the economy in general for that money to be in circulation.

https://www.epi.org/publication/congress-has-never-let-the-federal-minimum-wage-erode-for-this-long/

Edited by Look at Ray Ray Run
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

By the way, my apologies for not picking up your sarcasm. I agree with you 100%. We have 40 years of data telling us that this is hurting the middle class and lower class of this country, and yet you have vast amounts of middle and lower class earners agreeing with a system that harms them. It is truly baffling stuff. Every single member in the middle class should be for a substantial increase to the national minimum wage - it is by far the most beneficial thing for their continued growth of wealth.

Ray-Ray, I'd like to discuss some of this stuff. It would be interesting. Send me a PM. 

apologies for the thread hijack, everyone. I wanted to keep this 100% baseball related as it relates to baseball economics. 

Edited by Jack Parkman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Jack Parkman said:

Ray-Ray, I'd like to discuss some of this stuff. It would be interesting. Send me a PM. 

If you have questions Jack, feel free to PM me. When I get time, I will happily respond with my thoughts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

$12/hr in 1970, with the average cost of a home and school was a livable wage.

You could work a full-time summer job, on minimum wage, in 1970 and pay for a hefty portion of 1 years tuition. Today? If you worked a minimum wage job, for 3 months at 40 hours a week, you would net about $2800 which isn't even 10% of the average tuition for one year.

Housing costs are included in the basket of goods in the CPI which is reflected already in inflation.

You'll get no argument from me on the absurdity of today's educational costs, though.

Edited by chitown87

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, chitown87 said:

Housing costs are included in the basket of goods in the CPI which is reflected already in inflation.

You'll get no argument from me on the absurdity of today's educational costs, though.

Ahhh true true. I shouldn't have cited the housing in the same way I cited education. My premise was more so related to the buying power of that dollar; the escalation of home prices has been artificial for about 3 decades now as well, but that's for another discussion. 

The first thing a modern company cuts is middle and lower class people - they never cut the executive wages when the numbers look bad.

Edited by Look at Ray Ray Run
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, chitown87 said:

Housing costs are included in the basket of goods in the CPI which is reflected already in inflation.

You'll get no argument from me on the absurdity of today's educational costs, though.

Educational costs go hand in hand with the lack of support from the states.  Schools need to get money from somewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Schools need to get money from somewhere.

Tax revenue from marijuana sales to students....and teachers.

 

 

Edited by tray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

you have vast amounts of middle and lower class earners agreeing with a system that harms them. It is truly baffling stuff.

Not baffling Ray-Ray.. Religious and social issues are paramount in politics and always will be. Core beliefs are indoctrinated into young children before they are able to process data with any substantial life experience and learning.   It's also why no one can tell us not to be White Sox fans. We weren't born this way, but most of us got indoctrinated shortly thereafter and our allegiance will never change.

Edited by tray
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread went from Theo and Hahn to Renteria versus the field, to Marcus Semien in Oakland, to Hawk’s moves as GM and finally to economics. 

Got to love Soxtalk. Open up the Fillibuster, we can handle it! #Green

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you know what $15 an hour is for a full time worker? 30 grand before taxes

Is it that hard to want people to make at LEAST that?

An apartment in Chicago is on the low end $1000. Utilities are another 300 a month on the low end.  Access to the internet is at least $80 a month(phone or home service). Food for a single person is at least $200. A car payment is at least $200. Gas is likely $50 a week or more. 

At $15 an hour, you would make $2400 a month pre-tax. In this example, your low end costs are $1980.  you have $420 left over to save or spend. 

Now imagine those same costs making $7.25(the national minumum wage). You would earn $1160 pre tax, and be in the red $820.


 

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 I still think the team would be better off without RR.   The worst hitter in the lineup batted 4th.   I could see him batting Madrigal 4th who is not even close to being a power guy.   He's not a manager to take them further. 

 

 If I had to choose between him and Ventura I would ask for death to be another option.

 

Of course the Cubs always going with name didn't always work either.  Baker couldn't take them to the next level and Pinella didn't realize he joined a circus.

 

Still I think Ricky will take them to the usual land of underachievement.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kitekrazy said:

 I still think the team would be better off without RR.   The worst hitter in the lineup batted 4th.   I could see him batting Madrigal 4th who is not even close to being a power guy.   He's not a manager to take them further. 

 

 If I had to choose between him and Ventura I would ask for death to be another option.

 

Of course the Cubs always going with name didn't always work either.  Baker couldn't take them to the next level and Pinella didn't realize he joined a circus.

 

Still I think Ricky will take them to the usual land of underachievement.

Madrigal will never hit 4th-6th in this lineup.  Renteria will always have him 1-2 or 8-9.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×