Hacker News Reader

Comment by missedthecue | Hacker News Reader

I don't think anyone in America is working 40 hours and staying below the poverty line unless they have like... 8 kids as a single parent. It's really just not possible. McDonald's for 40 hours puts you well above poverty line

View on HN

https://www.businessinsider.com/bernie-sanders-walmart-mcdon...

> Around 70% of people on Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) food stamps and Medicaid work full-time, the watchdog found, and the majority of these worked for larger companies with 100 or more staff.

So no, you can be gainfully employed in the US and still be on food stamps.

That article is several years old and out of date. The poster you replied to would have been referring to current wages. Low income wages have made the largest percentage gains of any bracket since 2020.

I don't think anything you're saying supports the argument "I don't think anyone in America is working 40 hours and staying below the poverty line unless they have like... 8 kids as a single parent." So what's the point?

It is true that the parent comment was not nuanced and very likely not true. I think it's also true that linking an article from 2020 is a possibly misleading response, since low-income wages have made a sizable jump since then.

Pedantic point but you can be above the federal poverty level while still qualifying for Medicaid/SNAP.

The Federal Povery Level for 2024 is $15,060. Assuming 1,720 hours a year for full-time employment, that's just under $8.76/hr.

The federal minimum wage is still $7.25/hr. So, the ultimate takeaway is in most states in the US working full time employment at the minimum wage of the state you will be below the FPL.

One important thing to think about though is what percentage of low wage full-time jobs are actually still at the federal minimum wage?

Add a couple of kids (single parent) and the picture looks much worse.

And, as far as things go for the other 30%, I've known people on SNAP and Medicaid who need to very carefully limit how many hours they get, and even decline raises, for fear of edging over a threshold that causes them to lose support and end up even worse off, economically.

It strikes me as a great example of a policy incentivizing (enforcing, really) the very thing it's ostensibly supposed to discourage. These folks have dreams and want better jobs, and they're often deeply ashamed of being on welfare, but if you're supporting a family your overriding moral imperative is to make sure everyone is fed and healthy and that trumps everything else.

It's so incredibly stressful to live in a society where people have been raised on a Calvinist worldview that teaches that it's immoral to be unwealthy.

A single parent of three kids is considered a household size of 4, with a poverty line at 30k. That is basically the median full time salary in several professions in the retail and food industry.

Right. Exactly my point. You've got to have several dependents as a single parent to go back below the poverty line. With one or no dependents, it's virtually impossible.

Your original claim was that it requires an absurd amount of dependents. Having 2 dependents is rather common, and 3 not unheard of either. There are 10 million single parent households in the US, and 36% of them are in poverty. I am pretty sure that at least 1/3 of these parents work full time. So the number of single parent households at poverty line where parent works full time is probably 1 million or more.

I think you are speaking of the federal poverty line and they are talking about the ordinary definition of poverty. Nobody making the actual federal poverty line is surviving without help most places.

Plenty of people are living in poverty whilest working full time.

I am curious about how you think a $290/week (minimum wage) budget works.

Can you give me a breakdown of how a family of three can survive off of this? I figure if you can't see how anyone in America could be below water on a minimum wage salary, you must have a good idea of how to survive on a shoestring budget.

Here, I'll make it simple.

At approximately $1,260/month, how would much would you allocate to each category?

Rent/Mortgage:

Groceries:

Transportation:

Utilities:

Healthcare:

Personal / Misc:

Entertainment:

Debt repayment:

Savings:

Who pays $7.25? People quote that antiquated law as if it's a mandated wage. Fast food pays $15-20

Five states have not adopted a state minimum wage: Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina and Tennessee.

Two states, Georgia and Wyoming, have a minimum wage below $7.25 per hour. In all seven of these states, the federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour applies.

Most other states have higher minimums, but those in most cases have not kept up with inflation.

But in virtually all states you're broke af working for minimum.

You can look here at McDonalds jobs in small towns across Louisiana (randomly taken from your list). Avoiding cities because pay is higher there. Even in places like Pineville LA (pop 14k), they are starting fry cooks at double the federal minimum.

https://www.indeed.com/q-mcdonalds-application-l-louisiana-j...

You're very confused.

https://www.census.gov/newsroom/stories/poverty-awareness-mo...

I'm not confused. It is not possible to have no dependents and be below the poverty line working 40 hours

In my country, the easiest way to work 40 hours and still live in poverty is to move to the richest city in the country, get a job as a barista or cleaner or similar, and rent a small studio apartment.

> move to the richest city in the country, get a job as a barista or cleaner or similar, and rent a small studio apartment

I'm not sure which way you feel about this, but I'll emphasize that everyone else in the city is completely dependent on people making this life choice (or a related one, where they live outside the city in a stifling suburb, pay for it with years of their life spent commuting, and simultaneously lower everyone's health and quality of life by driving a car).

> McDonald's for 40 hours puts you well above poverty line

where the hell in America is that true? "well above" -- definitely not.

Federal minimum wage : $7.25 per hour

40h work week: $290 per week

52 weeks per year: $15,080.00

Federal Poverty level for 2024(family of 1): $15,060

https://www.healthcare.gov/glossary/federal-poverty-level-fp...

McDonalds average pay(Crew Member): $13.03 per hour

https://www.indeed.com/cmp/McDonald's/salaries/Crew-Member

40 hour work week: $521.2 per week

52 weeks per year: $27.102.40

Average McDonalds pay for crew member puts you above Federal Poverty Level for a family of 3 ($25,820).

If you take the family of 1 numbers, you are $12,042.4 above poverty. Almost double. I think that qualifies for well above.

I also don't think it is good living but take it up with the federal government if you want to talk about where the Poverty Line and Inflation numbers come from, since they are the ones who like to screw with it to make themselves look good.

Edit: I missed the part about requiring an absurd number of dependents, that isn't true. With one dependent, numbers don't look that bad but having 2(family of 3) you are basically living hand to mouth with no savings.

Spotted the person who's never been a retail/fast food wage slave. You don't get 40 hours. At best you'll get 34 or whatever makes it so you aren't classified as full time. And that's a good week. If corporate is trying to save hours, you might get 8 or 10 that week. You'll need a second job, obviously, but given that there's no set schedule, you'll spend even more time trying to coordinate the two.

I have, worked as a cashier for a couple years. I know they never let you get to 40 hours, if you do then they have to start offering benefits.

However, that wasn't part of the exercise. Grandparent stated that: > McDonald's for 40 hours puts you well above poverty line

I decided to run the numbers rather than go with gut feeling of no way. Figured I would share since I did the work.

Grandparent was only haft right since they also state you would need a crazy amount of dependents to put you at Federal Poverty Level. If you had 2 dependents, you are above but living hand to mouth and one accident away from povert.

That’s a fair point about it merely mirroring the grandparent’s exercise, and looking back on it my post had an unnecessarily antagonistic start. But I do believe it’s worth telling people that crappy jobs are crappy for reasons besides pure hourly pay; they have other features that are both demeaning and austere.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com