General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsLaelth
(32,017 posts)-Laelth
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)and many with free education. We're a third world country
brewens
(13,631 posts)easily afford a bump of several dollars per hour to everyone. If my company just gave me a third of what my health care costs and I no longer had to pay my contribution, I'm pretty confident that would cover whatever we needed to do to pay for the national health plan. Then I suppose what I pay in for Medicare already would also go toward that and make it even more reasonable.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)Medicare for all would be a tidal change for the people of the US - small business men AND working stiffs. But it would take some real courage from a leader.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)You would put millions out of a job!
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)contributions. They also have co-pays. I like the German system better than ours, but it simply is not 'no cost'. The insured pay directly. They do a good job of tailoring costs to income. But it is not guaranteed no cost care.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)And those all come with guaranteed healthcare, almost all of it no cost, and many with free education. We're a third world country.
That makes all the difference in the world!
Back to the BOG with you. Our healthcare sucks - it is the very worst in the rich world, and no amount of parsing will make it better.
TBF
(32,111 posts)Old Crow
(2,212 posts)Needs to be seen by as many Americans as possible. And that's a great point made by Doctor J about the additional factors of health care and education.
Wow. Remember when America used to lead? I remember when these kinds of figures first started coming out in the 80s, as America started adopting worse and worse public policies. Then, as now, the right wing had all sorts of reasons as to why the information (a) isn't relevant; (b) can't be trusted; (c) doesn't mean anything; (d) you-name-it.
littlemissmartypants
(22,839 posts)barbtries
(28,815 posts)shared on fb.
DRoseDARs
(6,810 posts)What's the buying power of someone making Denmark's minimum wage spending that wage IN Denmark? The only thing this graphic tells us (indirectly) is the currency exchange rate at the time the graphic was made and that workers making those wages would have a lot of buying power if they visit the US vs people making US minimum wage and buying here. It does NOT tell us if the people making minimum wage in those countries are actually making living wages (though I think we all can safely assume they do) in their home countries compared to workers here. This is why "minimum wage" is a term that's a bit archaic and falling out of favor in some circles while "living wage" paints a clearer picture.
Old Crow
(2,212 posts)I'll concede right up front that your main point is a good one. We're on the same team. That said, if the French minimum wage were to be doubled to $24.70/hr from $12.35, while the American worker's had remained unchanged, would you contend that the French worker's situation hadn't improved relative to the American's? I doubt it. Yet you contend in your post that these numbers show nothing in terms of the status of minimum wage workers in the various countries.
In short, you overstate your case. True, these numbers are not a perfect reflection of comparative earning powers because of the factor of currency exchange rates. Yet they do give a rough sense of what's going on. For my part, I'd rather see a poster like this, which you deride as "cute," than an underwhelming, more precise, poster that states "Due to the influence of currency exchange rates, comparing minimum wages among workers from various countries can be misleading. But I'm pretty sure that workers in other developed countries are doing better than their American counterparts."
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)Misleading, you know, like arguments we hear from Republicans that would do away with the minimum wage in its entirety.