Perpetual Dickensian Poverty? (2021)
There&#x27;s also a certain amount of framing going on in the original tweet to avoid facing whatever the actual issues are. What exactly is the issue here that is to be tackled?<p>Going with the USA, apparently something like 98% of people have managed to get work that pays better than the Federal minimum wage. If people on the minimum wage are being failed by society, there needs to be some reflection on what is happening differently with this 2% and how to change that. Legislating people&#x27;s favourite lucky number with reference to good literature is not the path to good policy.<p>Cratchit had enough money to almost-support a family with a sick son in presumably the absence of any sort of social spending - ie, he earned enough money to support 2-4 people in London with food and shelter depending on how sick Tiny Tim was, and had an office job with no physical risk. It is unclear why the default position is someone should (1) be doing the similar work as Cratchit (2) possibly with less responsibilities and (3) earning more money in real terms. I can see an argument why some 20 year old with no family doing similar work could be paid the same amount and that it would be quite reasonable. Especially since it is so much easier to move to a low cost of living area in this era of fantastic communication and easy travel.<p>In short, I&#x27;d question why near-poverty while supporting family is unacceptable as a <i>legal minimum</i>. There are a lot of people who don&#x27;t have a family.