As a renter, I have no way to charge an electric car nightly. The availability of charging infrastructure outside of private homes will be more and more of an issue, unless battery tech significantly improves to be at parity with gas (e.g. I spend 10 minutes at a public charger as if I were filling a gas car).
It might be true that you get more conservative after you e.g. own property, have a lot of money, or a bunch of other things that happened to boomers in their 30s.
Now that those things are far less accessible, people aren't moving conservative with nearly the same frequency. The fact that boomers did is a symptom of the easier time they had, but there's nothing intrinsic about aging that should make one more conservative.
Have you tried living off $9.24 an hour? That's about $370 a week before taxes.
Average rent in the US was $1372 a month 2023, which means just buying power isn't enough to figure this out. Many people who already own property miss the fact that it's largely impossible not to rent forever for anyone born after 1990, and extremely hard for anyone born after 1980 (on average -- it differs for cheaper areas, which won't be cheaper for much longer based on trends).
I'd argue we have multiple factors. Inflation is a huge one, but cost of living has in many ways outpaced inflation. Those two alone are additive, which is why even the current California minimum wage of $15.50 is not enough.
Let's leave it as an amorphous amount for now, and I'll ask a different question: what about a potential $50 minimum wage upsets you? What makes that a bad idea, in your view (and if you don't believe it is, apologies in advance!).
That's exactly it. Cost of living has outpaced wages for 50+ years. $100k might sound like a "made-it" salary, but it's actually not that compared to buying power of previous generations.
Yes, but one way is on the company first and one isn't. Would prices go up if these places were paying living wages? Most likely. Many businesses would be insolvent because their business model was simply never designed to pay a living wage to employees. Others could remain solvent, but probably not if they continue to take so much off the top at higher positions.
And that's exactly it: the market never self-corrects if we throw arbitrary money in excess of listed prices to solve was is ultimately an issue of business solvency and ethics. There is no economic theory that would support such an idea in any industry, but here we are.
The sheer number of businesses out of the space might even drive down rents. That's the kind of thing I mean by "other actions". But things cannot continue as they are.
None of this is even to mention the sheer number of people in the service industry who are also on government assistance programs. They have to be -- none of the blame is on them. But my tax dollars go to that, plus I am expected to pay extra to subsidize their wages with tips. I effectively subsidize them twice while someone reaps the rewards on their yacht. All I'm saying is the yacht people should be taking the risks first. That's part of being a business owner.
...so did OP, lol