Hacker News Reader

Comment by mlevental | Hacker News Reader

>$15/hour is still not much in the international market where Amazon sells its goods. In large parts of Europe it's less than what a warehouse worker makes.

i don't understand this comment. while i'm all for warehouse workers getting a fair wage i don't understand the point of comparing a us wage, being paid in the us, to us workers, to foreign workers in foreign economies? yes USD 15 is not enough to survive in Oslo but these people don't live in Oslo! $15USD is double the average us minimum wage! before taxes for a full working year that's 30k. again in many places in the us that's enough to get by and even probably save a little.

again i think everyone should be getting a fair wage and unskilled laborers should be treated with respect and dignity but that particular line is nonsensical.

View on HN

I can't even fathom trying to live on 30k. Where I live childcare costs around 20k, so many subsidies would be required for sure. Any little setback like unexpected healthcare or transportation costs would absolutely destroy you.

>I can't even fathom trying to live on 30k.

i have for most of my life lived on less than this. hell i lived on less than this in nyc. it's quite doable if you don't buy new clothes, don't own a car, don't travel, don't eat out, don't go to the movies, etc. you can even afford really bad health insurance. the only real issue is that you can't save enough for retirement (if you're comfortable living this way forever) and you can't save enough to take time off to get more education (votech or higher ed).

I too have lived in NYC on very little money, but I was young, healthy, and single. You list "can't save for retirement" as the only drawback, but I'd add "can't have a child" as another.

And I'm not sure about the actual numbers, but something like $30K per year basically puts one in a top 10% of the world, and more than $50K, you are already in the 1% of the world, by income. (not sure if that factors in cost of living).

not trying to disparage but this comment is wrongheaded in exactly the same way as the one i'm responding to. us workers don't live in subsaharan africa - so it doesn't matter if 30k is top 10% worldwide because we don't have global wage equilibrium. 30k for a single person is fine - you can eat and rent an apartment and probably drive a crappy car. it is not enough for a family, it is not enough to save for retirement, it is not enough to save for further education, and it is not enough to save for medical emergencies. it's not good enough.

You can't just ignore cost of living disparity though. $30K per year is a huge amount of money in some parts of the world -- that's enough to live very well, maybe support multiple wives if the culture allows it. But in San Francisco, that income level for a family puts you below the poverty line and you will struggle to afford housing.

It’s not 30k/year for many of these employees. They are temporary workers that never know when they have work and when they don’t. It’s 15/hour.

Also, 30k is a decent wage for a young person with no dependants. It’s not enough if you have kids, not even in the midwest or deep south.

Comparing wages to the markets where Amazon sells its goods is interesting when talking competition.

> Also, 30k is a decent wage for a young person with no dependants. It’s not enough if you have kids, not even in the midwest or deep south

a single person working full-time should be paid enough to support themselves, I can agree that companies and society have an obligation to make this happen. but why is it reasonable that the minimum allowable wage now has to support the worker and some arbitrary number of dependents?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com