Skip Navigation
StreetEasy Logo

Minimum wage is worth less than in 1968

Started by stevejhx
about 15 years ago
Posts: 12656
Member since: Feb 2008
Discussion about
Adjusted for inflation, the minimum wage was worth $8.54 per hour in 1968, according to calculations by the Economic Policy Institute. The current minimum wage is $7.25 per hour. http://lifeinc.todayshow.com/_news/2010/11/19/5495013-good-graph-friday-minimum-wage-is-worth-less-than-in-1968 Of course this is PERFECT for Riversider and LICCdope, where the poor get poorer, and everybody else lives in Long Island City.
Response by bjw2103
about 15 years ago
Posts: 6236
Member since: Jul 2007

steve, I can't believe any of this unless you show me a specific pay stub from 1968.

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by falcogold1
about 15 years ago
Posts: 4159
Member since: Sep 2008

steve,
consider the reality of the wage plus NYC. Sure it's adjusted for infaltion but I remember NYC in '68.
The city was heading for the hopper and the cost of living IN NYC was much more reasonable even if we adjust for inflation. Today, that wage id for HS kids with a PT job after school.

I've said it 1000 time;... stay off drugs, stay in school.
Actually, that's what I ment to say but it came out...want to cut class and puff it up?

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by jason10006
about 15 years ago
Posts: 5257
Member since: Jan 2009

Since Riversider says inflation is 9%, that mean McDonald's workers make $0.04 per hour in 1968 dollars.

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by truthskr10
about 15 years ago
Posts: 4088
Member since: Jul 2009

Hedonics!....ummm errrr Excelsior!

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by Riversider
about 15 years ago
Posts: 13572
Member since: Apr 2009

How can that be when we have no inflation?

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by stevejhx
about 15 years ago
Posts: 12656
Member since: Feb 2008

I was cutting lawns in 1968 bjw, and my father refused to pay his employer's social security obligations, so I had him arrested.

Where's LICCdope on this one?

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by urnfna
about 15 years ago
Posts: 174
Member since: Jul 2008

But in gold terms it is worth more.

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by stevejhx
about 15 years ago
Posts: 12656
Member since: Feb 2008

No, it's worth less. $8 would buy you a lot more gold in 1968 than it does today.

Silly goldsters don't even understand how it works.

"How can that be when we have no inflation?"

What? How said we had no inflation since 1968? You and you alone.

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by urnfna
about 15 years ago
Posts: 174
Member since: Jul 2008

I thought gold had no intrinsic value. So anything is worth more compared to valueless gold, right?

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by fieldschester
about 12 years ago
Posts: 3525
Member since: Jul 2013
Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by aboutready
about 12 years ago
Posts: 16354
Member since: Oct 2007

Busy, busy, busy. So busy.

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by fieldschester
about 12 years ago
Posts: 3525
Member since: Jul 2013

Aboutready were you busy this weekend too?

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by fieldschester
about 12 years ago
Posts: 3525
Member since: Jul 2013

AR, was your husband working this weekend?

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by aboutready
about 12 years ago
Posts: 16354
Member since: Oct 2007

Were you working this weekend? What's your tax bracket? What's your job? How much do you give back to society in the form of taxes? Do you have kids? Are they in public school? Does everyone in your immediate and extended family work? Have any ever needed public assistance? Do you volunteer?

Actually I don't really care about your answers, because in real life I wouldn't want to know you.

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by fieldschester
about 12 years ago
Posts: 3525
Member since: Jul 2013

You have this fascinating way of saying one thing and then saying another. Where did you learn that? You want to know but you don't? You are going to bed but you aren't? You don't work because of the taxes but you want higher taxes but you want greater levels of employment? You care but you don't care?

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by aboutready
about 12 years ago
Posts: 16354
Member since: Oct 2007

Bullshit. Nice try, though. Although I still say you're trying too hard. Can't imagine why.

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by fieldschester
about 12 years ago
Posts: 3525
Member since: Jul 2013

I'm trying to hard but I'm not trying hard enough?

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by aboutready
about 12 years ago
Posts: 16354
Member since: Oct 2007

And why didn't you answer the questions? Really.

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by fieldschester
about 12 years ago
Posts: 3525
Member since: Jul 2013

you said you didn't want to know. Now you do?

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by aboutready
about 12 years ago
Posts: 16354
Member since: Oct 2007

I don't think you have the moral integrity to answer the questions truthfully. Or answer them at all. Truthful answers might be interesting but I doubt that would happen.

Sad, hb, the only way you win arguments is semantics.

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by fieldschester
about 12 years ago
Posts: 3525
Member since: Jul 2013

I'm wrong but I'm right?

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by aboutready
about 12 years ago
Posts: 16354
Member since: Oct 2007

No, you are wrong. In every way the word is defined.

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by fieldschester
about 12 years ago
Posts: 3525
Member since: Jul 2013

Wow, there you go, finally something definitive out of your mouth.

Ignored comment. Unhide

Add Your Comment