What Percent of a Congressman's Salary Should Your Minimum Wage Be?

For those of you better at math than I am. I have this idea that the minimum wage should not just be 15 per hour, but it should also be index linked to a certain percentage above what is considered a poverty wage. But how to implement it?  What do you link it to?  Here's a little background.

Right now, the 2017 standard for a poverty wage is $12,060 for one person. So... a 100% raise still brings that wage to 24,120 per year. That's still just 11.60 per hour. Great.  I still need a roommate and food stamps if I'm living on my own.  That's if Big Ears McHeartless can stop trying to eliminate that while abusing himself by his bootstraps and a copy of Atlas Shugged.

15 per hour, as with the 15.dollar minimum movement is $31,200 a year. That's all before taxes mind ya.  And you're still lowballing the average citizen compared to his or her productivity growth.  Most studies I see of how the minimum wage should have grown if it was to maintain parity with the growth of productivity suggest that the minimum should be at least $20.00 to $22.00 per hour. Which, assuming $20.00 hr, nets you a yearly wage of 41.6 grand.  That sounds a lot more like you could afford your own apartment, do a car payment, pay your school loans AND eat.  Right?

So... get this. Multiplying $12,060.00 by 3.5 gives me a number of $42,210.00 per year. Which is roughly, $20.29 per hour. That's about right for the wage we OUGHT to be getting as a minimum from all the companies that have grown fat on our stolen productivity. So I'm thinking if I want to come up with legislation that index-links the minimum wage to what is currently considered to be a poverty level of income, then the minimum should be set to 350% of the current standard for a poverty wage.  However...

There's a problem with this.  I'd predict that what is considered to be a poverty wage could be gamed by a corrupt leadership. If everyone's making 350% of the poverty wage, then 42 grand a year / $20.30 an hour becomes the new standard for the minimum on which that percentage is based.  So wages and prices recursively spiral each other out of control.  And then the companies and corps start charging more for everything cos it's what the market will bear and what they can get away with if everyone is feeling more flush and confident in their spending. Yes? So you can't index link it to the poverty index. So what do you link it to?

It was either this or a movable goal-posts image.  And I dislike sports.

 You'd want to link it to a statistic that the companies couldn't fudge or manipulate, but is also indicative of the current cost of living in the economy to make sure that while the companies are getting their best bang for their buck out of their employees, that the employees are also not underselling themselves or giving away the store. So... You can't index link that to inflation. Cos inflation rates are going to be affected by the wage itself. You can't link it to the median wage of company owners, cos the 1% skews those numbers too wildly. And while I wouldn't mind a nice percentage per year equal to a 1 percenter's corporate salary, I'm thinking my local comic shop owner wouldn't be able to hire people at that kind of minimum wage. So what do you link that to in order to get a fair wage?  Who gets a nice bit of compensation and regular raises based on the cost of living?

Well, whose salaries ARE set that makes a good median that Wall Street can't manipulate to their own advantage? Who has a salary and is directly answerable to the people?  How about the salary of US representatives or congressmen? They make $174,000.00 a year. (Part-time no less!)  25% of congress' current wage is $43,500.00. That's $20.91 an hour.  And that comes nicely close to the $20.00 to $22.00 an hour that the minimum should have grown to had it kept pace with corporate profits over the last 40 years while the minimum wage has remained stagnant.  That's a wage where there's no variance; and one person's income isn't able to skew matters off the true. It's not gonna make the business owners scream bloody murder at anyone but Congressmen directly responsible for the minimum wage. (They're not gonna be so hot to raise their own salary unreasonably if it raises EVERYONE'S wage with them are they?)  Think 20.91's a lot?  Denmark's minimum is $25.00.  AND they get 35 hour weeks.  They're skipping along just fine.  Think prices will spiral?  Have a look at Washington state's record on that since they raised theirs to 15.  Or Australia's.

So... You index link the minimum wage to 25% Congress' current rate of compensation. And that percentage can be raised or lowered with the current rate of inflation if say... the businesses try to lobby to lower congressman's salaries to lower the minimum wage and cut their costs. Ay... cost of doing biz in the US. Somehow I doubt you'll get a congressman to vote to lower his own salary. There's no one more mindful that their salary meets the cost of living more than a congressman.

Of course they may try and lower the index linked percentage of their salary, but I imagine that's going to go over like a whore in church isn't it? I can see the headlines now. "Paul Ryan thinks you're 80% less worthy than him. And that you should be paid like it." There's nothing will mobilize people like being told they're not as worthy as someone else. Or that you shouldn't be paid as much. And it takes the focus off of how much the different sexes or races get paid on average. Essentially we are all worth, monetarily, at least THIS percentage of what our elected leaders make. And if they want to say we're worth less % of their salary, I hope they're willing to stake their office on it. What do you think folks?