Minimum wage better than $60k/year salary?

[Jacob]

There seems to be no good reason to work more than one day a week at minimum wage.
This looks above board, but can it be right?
The claim is, and the chart shows, that

a one-parent family of three making $14,500 a year (minimum wage) has more disposable income than a family making $60,000 a year.

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/ent...ome-family-mak

If the family provider works only one week a month at minimum wage, he or she makes 92 percent as much as a provider grossing $60,000 a year.

[TripletDaddy]

bizarre quote. the data provided shows clearly that a person on minimum wage has almost no disposable income while the person making 60K has amost 35K in disposable income.

[Jacob]

bizarre quote. the data provided shows clearly that a person on minimum wage has almost no disposable income while the person making 60K has amost 35K in disposable income.

Perhaps you are defining disposable income differently. The bottom line economic benefit is the point.

[TripletDaddy]

Perhaps you are defining disposable income differently. The bottom line economic benefit is the point.

what other way is there to define disposable income? income minus taxes.

Also, it implies that those government programs are cash payouts (by comparing "disposable income").

It is a sloppy chart, imo.

[Flystripper]

what other way is there to define disposable income? income minus taxes.

Also, it implies that those government programs are cash payouts (by comparing "disposable income").

It is a sloppy chart, imo.

Hey I know I always like to take my vacations with that utility assistance income I get.

[wuapinmon]

I assure you that living on $60k a year wins over being poor, every time.

[FN Phat]

I assure you that living on $60k a year wins over being poor, every time.

60k a year for a sole provider is living poor on many areas of the country.

[Uncle Ted]

There seems to be no good reason to work more than one day a week at minimum wage.
This looks above board, but can it be right?
The claim is, and the chart shows, that




http://www.zerohedge.com/article/ent...ome-family-mak

Hmm... so if someone sits at home and collects an unemployment check they might just be as well off as working. Could unemployment be artificially high because of this?

One thing that bugs me about this chart is the Medicaid and CHIP. This must assume that they are using the maximum amount of Medicaid/CHIP or something.

[Jarid in Cedar]

Hmm... so if someone sits at home and collects an unemployment check they might just be as well off as working. Could unemployment be artificially high because of this?

One thing that bugs me about this chart is the Medicaid and CHIP. This must assume that they are using the maximum amount of Medicaid/CHIP or something.

I think the assumption is that it would cost about $15,000 a year to purchase the type of coverage that chip/ Medicaid provides. And for a family plan, that is fairly close.

[New Mexican Disaster]

Those are some damn expensive student lunches at $10 a pop. Angus sloppy joes and chianti for the youngsters.

[cowboy]

Those are some damn expensive student lunches at $10 a pop. Angus sloppy joes and chianti for the youngsters.

School lunch assistance actually pays for two meals a day. Most schools with a high proportion of free and reduced lunch students will serve breakfast now. I agree that it's still expensive at $5, but that's what it costs. In fact, it doesn't cover the cost for many districts, and they have to fund the lunch program in part from their general fund.

[Viking]

THis assumes the benefits earned by the min wage worker would have value to the $60k worker, or that the $60k worker has comparable expenses. In one case, the individual creates their disposable income, against which there will be expenses such as healthcare, food, etc. In the other, someone is gifted those expenses, or gifted their disposable income.

There's economically no difference between someone who makes $60k and nets $35k (with further expenses that deduct from income) and someone who makes nothing but is given comparable COL benefits with a $35k value.

[BlueHair]

There seems to be no good reason to work more than one day a week at minimum wage.
This looks above board, but can it be right?
The claim is, and the chart shows, that




http://www.zerohedge.com/article/ent...ome-family-mak

I double dog dare you to do this in 2011 and come back and report your findings.

[byu71]

To me this argument over Estate taxes is so bogus. I hear over and over the Estate tax compromise is a real slap in the face of these liberal dems. As I see it the repubs want 1 million and the dems want 5 million. The dems also want 45%. Let's look at the numbers and the difference.

The amount represents 1.6 million in tax. 45% times 4 million. This is how it affects the rich.


$5,000,000 $10,000,000 50,000,000 100,000,000

32% 16% 3.2% 1.6% percentage diff. between R and D plan

The dems plan is not about millionaires and billionaires, it is about nailing those whose net worth is between 1 and 10 million.

Let's have a good debate, but let's not play games with words that indicate you are going after the multi, multi millionaires. Their rhetoric would be more accurate if their claim of going after millionaires and billionaires increased the Estate tax say after 10 million to 70%.

If I am mistaken with my numbers, I welcome enlightenment.


Note: Wrong thread, but I don't know how to move it to the Bush tax thread.

[frank ryan]

The chart doesn't take into account the basic eligibility requirements of those programs. TANF money is capped at either at 36 months I believe.
Food Stamps also require an employment and training component. You would need a reason to be exempt from that requirement if you were going to sit on your duff and collect benefits.
Also, I believe the amount of Food Stamps you receive effects your eligibility for utility assistance and housing aid.
Why are CHIP and Medicaid lumped in together? Those are two different programs. Seems like a lazy chart to me.