Hacker News Reader

Comment by qwerty888 | Hacker News Reader

Economists don't like protectionist unions. Who determines a "living wage"? Should someone working as a cashier in Walmart be able to afford an apartment in Manhattan?

View on HN

Someone working as a cashier in Walmart should be able to afford shelter, food, and necessary non-emergency medical expenses. A 'living wage' is just that -- I work for you, you pay me at least enough to survive employment. What that amounts to, obviously, depends on the standard of living in any particular area.

So minimum wage in Manhattan should be set at $50/hour?

If it's impossible to survive in (or on, whatever) Manhattan for less than that, then yes. But I suspect there's a more flexible reality to the market than your question implies, given that people there already work for less than that and aren't dying in the streets as a result.

A minimum wage just means you can't decide one day that sales are down and now everyone makes 2 cents an hour to cover costs [1]. It means there should be an implicit minimum cost to maintaining a human workforce, because people need to eat.

[1]obviously not an economist

No,because rent in Harlem (a few train stops away) requires less to live on.

If there is 1 adult with 3 children it is close: $41.91

http://livingwage.mit.edu/places/3606151000

"Living wage" is a pretty common economic concept. Feel free to google it.

I'm actually an economist and the term is only used by non-economists.

I'm actually an economist and I use it all the time.

> Economists don't like protectionist unions.

He who pays the piper calls the tune.

What peer-reviewed research paper are you citing for your claim?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com