So I've listened to Nickle and Dimed by Barbara Ehrenreich. And let me just give a brief review of it here.
Nickel and Dimed is about Barbara's adventure of living life in the lower-20% of the economy. Barbara left behind her upper-class writer's status to take on such jobs as waitressing (2 different accounts of that job), WalMart, Maid service, Hotel Maintenance, and warehouse work over a span of 6 months, 2 months each at 3 different locations. She had somewhere between 1000-2000 dollars for start-up costs (for first/last month's rent, app fees, and any other fees as well) but after she had an apartment to live in for the 2-months time, she then relied only on the money she made at her various jobs for food and the rent for the following month. Though, she did promise herself that she would never go hungry. She'd buy cheap food, but if it came to the point she couldn't afford beans or ramon noodles, then she would pull from her "normal life's" money.
Honestly, if you ask me those two 'cheats' or "concessions" could have caused the experiment to be null and void. The truly poor don't have another "life" with which to pull money from. If the truly poor cannot afford food, then they go without or borrow from friends and family. They would also visit a food pantry. Also, those that work at an hourly wage of below $10/hour, most likely don't have the luxury of saving up 1000-2000 for start-up living costs. But, I suppose that the very fact that Barbara had these rules to "cheat" with, and still could not make it, should speak volumes about the fact that it is near impossible to live on a less-than-$10/hour income.
Reading Nickle and Dimed, along with my current financial situation, has caused me to be absolutely irate at the state of minimum wage and the economy of the workforce in general. Barbara ended her book with a reflection/conclusion chapter, in which she stated that it is impossible to live on the current minimum wage. She also noted that economist said that, at the time the book was published (2008) the "absolute lowest amount" that any worker should be paid in order to survive is $15/hour. That's over twice what current minimum wage is. And if you ask me, there is something wrong with that.
Minimum wage basically states that the absolute lowest an employer can pay its employees is 7.25/hour, if I remember correctly. In essence, this is saying that a person's life, at least the life of a person working a "lower-end" job, is worth 7.25 an hour. Which, would probably be ok if we still lived in a time where bread was 68 cents and gas was less than a dollar. Instead, you can barely buy a pot pie for a dollar. Yet minimum wage is still 7.25 an hour.
And while I do not get paid minimum wage, I still feel as though I am in fact underpaid for the work I do. In my opinion, if you spend 40+ hours a week working somewhere, then you should be entitled to at least $10/hour from them. At a full time job, you are not just "helping out"; you have a set job which they depend on you to do. Unlike a lot of part-time jobs, full time jobs require your presence 40 hours a week (or 23% of you entire week including sleep-time) and allow their workers 1-2 weeks a year for vacation. Aside from these 1-2 weeks, you might have 1 work-week's time for doctor visits, sick time, or other issues that might cause you to not make it to work. Part-timers are allowed to call into work when they are sick with less repercussions than their full time counter-parts. Part timers, many of them especially in the restaurant or retail businesses, may even have the possibility, or responsibility, to call in another employee to take their shift for them. People working full time do not have this luxury and that is just one reason that their pay should be significantly higher than those that put in 10-30 hours of work a week.
Of course, a full time job usually also means that insurance is covered... err... erase that, a full time job often means that insurance is offered. If a full time employee is only paid $8/hour, and then opts to have insurance, (I am going to go on a tangent here and just say I did not want to use the word "opt" here. Health insurance, one of the most expensive insurances, is basically mandatory, especially if you happen to be female. Not having health insurance can be a truly bad financial decision should you get in a bad car wreck, get cancer, or even become sick in a way that makes you exhausted and thereby influences your productivity at work.) typical insurance, that still has deductibles and co-payments, can run upwards to $50-100 or more a paycheck. This number only goes up for those that are married and have kids. And all that money comes out of your paycheck after taxes are taken out, meaning even a lower take-home amount with which to pay off internet, student loan, cell phone, rent/mortgages, buy food, gas, clothes, ect.) Full time workers, who devote so much of their time to the company that they work for, should at least be paid enough so that they can afford to buy the insurance that the company offers, as well as survive and be able to pay their other debts and responsibilities.
Otherwise, what's the point in devoting so much of your time to one place? You'd probably make more money working 2 part-time jobs.
NOTE: When mentioning full time employees, I am talking about the majority of that class who does not have the luxury to call in or have others work their shifts for them. I am FULLY for ALL workers, full and part-time, being paid $15 or more an hour. My rant about full time employees is just to say that if companies can't afford to pay their employees over 10/hour, then at the very least pay 10/hour to the people who commit to 40 hrs/week to being there and working for you. Possibly sacrificing time with their children and spouse, and very possibly inhibiting communication with others outside of the job and taking a slight jab at the quality of those relationships.
I am NOT against part-time work. To be honest, I want to get out of the cooperate-full-time work and rejoin the workforce as a bartender or server. I have, in the past held 2 part time jobs, both in the restaurant business, and I am not saying that these jobs are worth-less or second-class. In many ways, one might even argue that part-time employees should be paid more than the full times I was arguing for earlier. After all, as a full time employee I am but a part in a factory. I do my one job over and over and over again all day. True, if I don't show up the work piles up and doesn't get done, but i really only have that one function. Part time employees, on the other hand, often have to be able to efficiently work 4-5 different jobs at the same time. No, simultaneously, but a part time employee may have to work cashier one day, stocking the next, and inventory the day after that. So there is a lot to say about underpaying part timers as well.
