politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
The fight for $15 movement started 13 years ago. $15 in 2012 money is equal to over $20 in 2025 money. It's taking the most progressive senator we've got to even suggest a pittance that is below what we've been asking for for over a decade.
Median one bed apartment rent, across the entire US, is $1550 as of Feb 2025.
Lets knock 20% of that off, to approximate a median studio apartment instead, give some leeway to poorer parts of the country.
(there are not as good or reliable general stats counted for studio apartments, but a studio being 20% less than a one bed is... hopefully a reasonable, napkin math aporoximation)
Ok, that's $1240.
Alright, now we use the 'rent should be 30% of your income' rule.
Thats $4135 a month, rounded up very slightly to the nearest 5.
Ok, 40 hours a week, roughly 4 weeks a month = 160 hours.
4135 / 160 = $25.85, again rounded up to the closet 5 cents for simplicity, so thats your actual minimum 'living wage'.
If you wanna say a studio should be 30% off a one bedroom?
Math works out to roughly $22.60
If you wanna say an actual one bedroom should be the standard, works out to about $32.60
Any way you look at this, $17 an hour is too low, that's still... you can't even afford a studio (as in, you cannot pass the rent to income threshold without a cosigner or double deposit or somethingnon your lease) you need roommates, you're still living with your parents.
And it is $17 in 2030.
Here from Europe, let me recommend one thing we do well: we link our equivalent of social security to the average wage growth, not to inflation.
This ensures that all voters benefit from wage growth. And thus all voters demand the same thing from the politicians.
Makes too much sense.
Sensible policies are Unamerican, judging by what has been passed by Congress in the last 20 years.
we can't even get it to 15, what do you think are chances of doing that are lol
I know, but these things tend to be all or nothing.
Either the American workers don't seize power and they continue to get exploited, or they seize power and then a lot will be possible.
The problem with that happening in the US is there has been no wage growth, only retraction. Between inflation and wage inequality our purchasing power is nearly half what it was 25 years ago.
That's the point. Your problem is that a lot of voters aren't affected by wage growth. So politicians don't feel the pressure to enact wage growth.
All those senior people will actually vote for the guy who keeps wage growth in check.
The very people that would benefit are the same ones saying they don't deserve it.