"In December 2013, 151 House Democrats signed a letter written by Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) and George Miller (D-CA), which opposed the fast track trade promotion authority for the TPP. Several House Republicans opposed the measure on the grounds that it empowered the executive branch. In January 2014, House Democrats refused to put forward a co-sponsor for the legislation, hampering the bill's prospects for passage"
A new report by the National Low-Income Housing Coalition shows that there is no state in the U.S. where a full-time, minimum-wage worker can afford the rent of a one-bedroom apartment, Vox reports.
According to the report, the national average Housing Wage in 2015 is $19.35 for a two-bedroom unit, and $15.50 for a one-bedroom unit, while the federal minimum wage remains at $7.25 per hour in 2015, which hasn’t been raised since 2009. In 13 states and D.C., Housing Wage is more than $20 per hour. The Housing Wage is an estimate of the full-time hourly wage that a household must earn to afford a decent apartment at HUD’s estimated Fair Market Rent (FMR) for no more than 30% of their income.
The data from the report show a gap between wages and rents across the country. In no state or D.C. can a full-time minimum-wage earning worker at the federal minimum wage afford a one- or two-bedroom apartment for his or her family. With the exception of just a few counties in Washington and Oregon (where the state minimum wage is $9.47 and $9.25, respectively), in no county in the U.S. a one-bedroom unit at the FMR is affordable to someone working 40 hours a week at the minimum wage, according to the report.
A map included in the report shows the hours a worker would have to work each week to afford a one-bedroom apartment. Among the states where a worker has to work the most hours to afford housing are Hawaii (125), Maryland (101), DC (100), New Jersey (100) and California (92).
In some localities where the state and local minimum wages are higher than the federal minimum wage, the Housing Wages are also much higher than the minimum wages, according to the report. In San Francisco, California, for instance, the state and local minimum wages are $9.00 and $12.25, respectively, while the Housing Wages for a one- and a two-bedroom apartment are $31.44 and $39.65, respectively.
These data may help explain the findings of a Brookings Institution report. According to the report, an average resident of a U.S. metro area lives 90 minutes or less away from only 30 percent of the jobs in that area.
Living far away from jobs, in turn, can impede residents’ ability to earn more, Vox’s Joseph Stromberg points out. A recent study which tracked 5 million children starting in the 1980’s found that among factors such as crime rates, schools, and levels of inequality, a neighborhood’s average commuting time strongly correlated with its residents’ ability to ascend to a higher income bracket than their parents.
http://www.rawstory.com/2015/05/you...nt-anywhere-in-america-on-a-minimum-wage-job/
http://nlihc.org/sites/default/files/oor/OOR_2015_FULL.pdf
Blame the poor!
I don't care how long it's been that way. We have the power and ability to change it, and we should
Of course I'm not married
Man, I can't stop looking at this, she was hot as fuck!I'd eat 20 year old Monica's pussy, who the fuck can blame Bill?
The cost of importing was crippling in the 50s, once it became less costly the trend started. Low wages also plays a role though, that's true. We also blew up most of the developed world's manufacturing base during the 40's, that had a shit ton to do with the lack of off-shoring too. It's not like we would blow shit up in a country then be welcome to open up shop immediately after. It took a while.
The system we currently have sees massive corporations like GE pay effectively a 0% tax while any potential competition would have to jump through a myriad of expensive hoops just for the right to compete followed up by paying the highest statutory rate in the free world. Does this promote or impede competition here in your mind?
OK, so you are opposed to enacting legislation preventing American corporations from offshoring jobs?
You live in America, you operate in America. You wanna do business elsewhere, you live there
So you believe growing the American economy doesn't involve ensuring American companies don't offshore their jobs to pay lower labor costs?
That's because you're partisan and will find any reason to blame problems on those you disagree with
anywere nice in la county is 700/800 just to rent a ROOM off someone... with the exception of palmdale and lancaster
So everyone that owns a piece of Kia, Toyota, Mercedes etc must live here or take their business elsewhere? How does this help? Or are you saying you want one set of rules here for American Businesses to operate here under but a different set for foreign business to operate here? Do you think that will encourage or discourage growth of American entrepreneurship?
I believe there are many methods to growing our economy and most have to do with enticements, not restrictions. What would Apple be today if they weren't allowed to operate at least partly offshore? Do you think their ability to offshore production has increased the jobs they have available here or do you think if they had to build here they would still be the giant they are?
Yeah, Jeffrey Immelt. He's the jobs czar... no conflict of interest there, but at least the dude has business experience.
