Why Hillary Clinton's $12 Minimum Wage is INSUFFICIENT

[Segami]

Last edited Tue Nov 10, 2015, 04:42 PM - Edit history (1)

Hillary Clinton endorsed a $12 per hour minimum wage. We use MIT's living wage calculator and look at some U.S. counties to show that $12 per hour is not a living wage in many cases. The conclusion? $15 should be the absolute minimum.

"..Millions of Americans are working for totally inadequate wages. We must ensure that no full-time worker lives in poverty. The current federal minimum wage is starvation pay and must become a living wage. We must increase it to $15 an hour over the next several years..."

https://berniesanders.com/issues/a-living-wage/

[JaneyVee]

1. The difference between the 2 after taxes...

Is about $30/week.

[Autumn]

2. $30/week. That a nice chuck of change to the working poor. nt

[jalan48]

66. $1500 a year. Not much if you have money but a lot if you don't.

What's the saying about walking a mile in another person's shoes?

[Segami]

3. How many hours a week are you basing this on?

[HerbChestnut]

5. Yeah, that's a good point.

$3*40=$120/week

After taxes that might be something like $80-100 depending on individual situations.

[JaneyVee]

7. No. More like $30/week.

Tax brackets and stuff. But you're right, it could depend on deductions. Might push it up to $40/week.

[HerbChestnut]

9. In what world would somebody making minimum wage pay 66% in taxes.

Certainly not in this country.

[JaneyVee]

11. We're not talking about current min wage, we're...

Talking about a $15/hr min wage. That would push up your tax bracket and in many states also make you ineligible for medicaid.

[Luminous Animal]

15. People working full time and earning $7.25, or $12.00, or $15.00 are all in the same 15% tax bracket

[JaneyVee]

19. Don't forget state taxes, and...

It's 15% above the $9,225.

[Luminous Animal]

24. And? Likely still in the same bracket for your state and still with far more that $30.00 in your

pocket per week. And, even if it were "only" $30.00, that is $30.00 that you did not have before.

[JaneyVee]

27. I agree wages need to be raised...

You're preaching to the choir. My point is, the difference between $12/hr and $15/hr is hardly a hair on fire situation. And Bernie wants $15/hr by 2020 while Hillary wants $12/hr by 2016.

[jeff47]

46. So Clinton has a time machine?

She'll take office in 2017 and make 2016's minimum wage $12/hour?

[BeanMusical]

65. Roflmao!

Good one.

[merrily]

28. Some people work 2 and 3 jobs. And even $30 a week is significant to someone living hand to mouth.

Haven't you read any first person accounts by people who say they run out of food by the end of the week or two weeks or however often it is that they can paid? I sure have. They are not going to turn up their noses at $30 per week.

[HerbChestnut]

16. Even then

I highly doubt someone would pay 66% in taxes making $15/hr. I also think it's reasonable to believe that tax brackets would be adjusted to reflect the new minimum wage.

[Massacure]

21. His numbers are off

Before taxes, the raw difference in income is $120. $6240 a year, or $120 a week. After taxes, the raw difference in income is $5304 a year, or $102 a week.

[JaneyVee]

25. You're only looking at federal taxes...

Check your paycheck for all of the other taxes involved, including state taxes, etc.

[HerbChestnut]

37. Thanks for doing out the math.

[merrily]

50. Not surprised. Your model is based on $3 an hour for a 40 hour week. Many work 80 hour weeks.

Guy in my my building works 7 to 3 with no lunch break, then runs to a nearby building for the 3 to 11 shift, with no dinner break. Same Building Management Company, and he is a stellar employee, so they cut him a few minutes slack to start the 3 to 11 shift. A relative works two part time jobs that make equal over forty hours a week, and so on.

[JaneyVee]

22. The tax is based on your full paycheck, but...

You're right, tax brackets would most likely need to be adjusted.

[jeff47]

45. Hey look! You're making shit up again!

Someone making $15/hour, 40 hours/week, 50 weeks/year makes $30,000 before taxes.
Someone making $12/hour, 40 hours/week, 50 weeks/year makes $24,000 before taxes.

The 15% tax bracket ends at:
$37,450 for single filers
$74,900 for joint married and widow(er)
$50,200 for head of household.

So no, it does not push up anyone's tax bracket.

http://www.irs.com/articles/2015-federal-tax-rates-personal-exemptions-and-standard-deductions

[JaneyVee]

47. Right, now add state taxes on top of that.

[jeff47]

49. Show me a state that has a bracket between $24k and $30k.

You're the one claiming it pushes someone into a new tax bracket. So show me a state that has a bracket between $24k and $30k.

Note: You're gonna need a really, really, really fucking big jump in that bracket to take away 66% of the difference in income.

[JaneyVee]

58. Why 66%? Now you're forgetting the federal taxes.

And it also depends on deductions. That being said, I'm all for raising wages, it is crucial. My whole original point was that the difference between the 2 is hardly revolutionary or life changing. And both numbers are going to need to take into account the difference between metropolitan states and rural states.

[jeff47]

60. No, I'm not. Both incomes are in the same federal tax bracket.

That bracket is 15%.

You are claiming 66% of the increased income is lost via taxes.

[JonLeibowitz]

69. It's total BS.

I make $36k (still in grad school) and my effective tax rate (state & federal) in california is 14%. That's more than what someone on a $15 minimum wage would make in a year. California has a very high tax rate too. I do my own taxes, so I know damn well what the tax situation is like. The situation is even better for folks who are married.

All said and done, most of that $3/hr goes directly to the earner, not the government.

[uppityperson]

70. I guess you would not complain about taking a $3/hr pay cut since its just not that much?

[taught_me_patience]

63. You do know that tax brackets are marginal right?

[Segami]

23. Even such rough estimates....

would give someone working an average 40 week with a $3/hr increase would give them $320 - $400 more earnings per month...(based on your figures)

[JaneyVee]

30. Yes, before federal and state taxes.

That's my point.

[Segami]

33. What exactly is your point?

How do you arrive at only $30 difference based on a 40hr work-week earning $3/hr more?

Please explain how you have arrived at this $30 difference.

[JaneyVee]

40. I estimated based on 0 deductions with fed and state tax included.

Both hourly rates (12 and 15) could gross higher wages depending on deductions. For example, Someone making $12/hr could even possibly take home more pay than someone making $15/hr depending on deductions (and state).

[JaneyVee]

6. 40.

[Segami]

8. 40??...

Can you explain how you get only a $30 a week difference working 40 hours a week?

[JaneyVee]

13. Tax bracket on $15/hr is different from $8/hr.

[Segami]

17. We're NOT talking about $8/hr.

The discussion is difference between $12/hr and $15/hr.....a $3/hr difference.


How do you arrive at $30 difference based on a 40hr week?

[JaneyVee]

20. Your full paycheck gets taxed, not just...

The difference between 12 and 15.

[Segami]

26. You still have NOT explained how you got to $30 week difference.

Last edited Mon Nov 9, 2015, 08:49 PM - Edit history (1)

[JaneyVee]

35. Depends on deductions.

I was estimating based on 0. Both hourly rates could be higher depending on deductions.

[Segami]

41. LOL!

Nice try but its back to the sandbox for you.

[JaneyVee]

42. What?

If you make $15/hr with 0 dependents and someone else makes $12/hr with 5 dependents. Do you know how paychecks work? It also varies by state. Some states flat taxes, some progressive taxes, some no state taxes.

[Segami]

48. LOL! Now you move the goal posts

and introduce dependents into this discussion to wiggle out of your $30 difference.

LOL...Of course,.....now you pad up the person earning $12/hr with 5 dependents but give the person earning $15/hr o dependents......WHY?....

Where did this scenario come from.....mars? Why not leave them BOTH with equal dependents or zero dependents for your calculations?

[JaneyVee]

52. Or you can just do the math yourself.

I actually was giving you an estimate based on 1 deduction for each originally, but I live in a high tax state so your math may be different. There are a number of factors involved, I'm sure we can both agree on that.

[Segami]

57. NO. You still haven't shown

me how you arrived at $30 difference.

I see a lot of words and smoke coming from you, but you still haven't shown me how you arrived at the $30 difference as you initially stated.

Were you trying to trash this thread (Bernie positive) with misinformation?.....

[pangaia]

36. Give up. You're wasting your time with this guy/gal.

[JaneyVee]

43. You give up. We're discussing the issues.

[pangaia]

44. ooppsie

[jeff47]

53. No, at the moment you're lying about tax rates.

$8/hr at 40 hr/week at 50 wk/year = $16,000. That's in the 15% bracket
$15/hr at 40 hr/week at 50 wk/year = $30,000. That's also in the 15% bracket.

[jeff47]

51. No, it isn't. Both are in the 15% bracket at 40 hr/week. (nt)

[cstanleytech]

64. We need a long term solution though and just raising the minimum wage is only a short term one

and we will just be back where we are now in a few years.
We must address the wage issue at a corporate level and give corporations a reason to pay their works a wage thats above the poverty level and that means lower taxes for corporations but......................the % they get in tax breaks is directly linked to how many of their employees are earning poverty level wages.
Better the pay and fewer the employees earning poverty wages the lower the tax burden for a company, the more employees they have earning poverty wages the higher their taxes.

[HerbChestnut]

4. $120/mo

That's a couple of bills right there. Might even be all that's left over to put away into a checking or savings account in case something goes wrong down the road.

[JaneyVee]

10. True, but...

And I'm all for raising wages to $12-$15/hr, but most people are employed by small biz and if a small biz has 25 workers costs could add up. I do think $12/hr should be the floor, with cities and high cost of living places higher.

[angrychair]

67. Thanks

You highlighted the point perfectly.
I say again, "I am being 'compromised' or 'real world solutions' into the God damn poor house."

[NorthCarolina]

12. After the election she'll probably "forget" about it anyway.

Or maybe get a "bipartisan" $0.25/hr increase and call it a "campaign promise kept".

[Massacure]

14. There are two things people should keep in mind

1) Unless we end up with a Congress like the 111th where Democrats outnumbered Republicans 255-179 in the House and 59-41 in the Senate, a $15 minimum wage is dead on arrival.

2) Depending on the source of information, it peaked somewhere about $10.30 - $10.60 in 1968. If a Democratic president pitched a $15 wage and negotiated down to say $11 in order to get enough Republican votes, it would still be a huge win for a lot of people (and adjusted for inflation still higher than at any point in US history).

[Hoyt]

18. Sanders us "proposing" $15 by 2020. What's date for $12?

Whatever, it needs to increase substantially soon.

[randys1]

29. They could both be saying the same thing, I dont know, but you would never

know around here.



Raise the taxes on the wealthy, dramatically, and on corps, while simultaneously adding tariffs on all imports after dumping TPP and then provide massive interest free loans to new startups making what we buy

[BlueJazz]

38. Absolutely. We're not going to get this "Income disparity" thing corrected by doing some mealy-mouth

...half-assed solutions. As usual, by the time higher minimum wages kick in, the average worker is just about staying even.

This whole disgusting thing reminds me of somebody with a burned out transmission barely making it into a garage and being told..
(by the mechanic).. "Let me get my paint can and I'll make it look good as new."

[randys1]

39. Capitalism didnt work. Land ownership is stupid. Time to start over.

[pinebox]

31. THIS!

[Lil Missy]

32. $12 can pass in Congress, $15 is DOA n/t

[jeff47]

54. So you ask for $15 and get $12.

Have you never negotiated on anything in your life?

[yallerdawg]

34. What can you get?

Obama is proposing $10.10. By executive order, federally-funded contractors now pay minimum $10.10 an hour. But it is not even on agenda for national minimum wage. Remember Republican majorities?

Senator Sanders (I-VT) proposes $15 per hour for national minimum wage? Goes nowhere now.

So, Hillary kind of splits the difference. We are talking $7.25 to $12.00? The last increase was a phased-in $5.15 to $7.25. This kind of increase has precedent. Doable.

Politics is the art of compromise.

Ideally, we need a minimum income paid for through progressive taxation. Talk about going nowhere...

[jeff47]

55. You don't get $12 by asking for $12.

If you ask for $15, you get $12.
If you ask for $12, you get $9-10.

[JaneyVee]

59. Ask who?

Hillary will have a united party, hence all of the party endorsements, and Democrats will stand united. Bernie otoh will spend most of the time fighting with both party's, hence his lack of endorsements.

[jeff47]

61. :facepalm:

You've spent months arguing about the need to get things past the Republicans in Congress.

And now you're saying "ask who?"

Seriously, do you remember any of your own posts?

[Doctor_J]

56. triangulating as usual, just like on marijuana

Probably weakest candidate I can remember, from a leadership standpoint. No morals, no principles, and absolutely no vision for the country.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

62. Like a lot of rich people, she's a cheapskate.

[Thespian2]

68. Exactly when did

the 1%er work for minimum wage?...During the Goldwater years?...


1%ers haven't a clue about minimum wage and its effect on the lives of the majority of Americans...

[Catherina]

71. and an insult to the workers who are out in force today demaning Bernie's $15

LA right now