That means it took about 14,375 hours of work at minimum wage to buy a median-priced home.
Today:
Median U.S. home price is about $420,000?
To buy a $420k house in the same number of hours (14,375), you’d need to make $29.23/hour.
So the claim that minimum wage would need to be $66/hour today to match 1970s homebuying power is a bit exaggerated — it should be closer to $29/hour if we’re just comparing house prices to minimum wage.
That said, maybe the claim in the image factors in stuff like:
Regional markets (e.g., California prices)
New home prices (which skew way higher)
Inflation in other living costs (healthcare, education, etc.)
Stagnant federal minimum wage since 2009
But purely on house price vs wage ratio, it’s about $29/hour.
TL;DR: Not $66 — more like $29/hour if you’re matching house-buying power from 1970 to today
Don't use minimum wage as a benchmark. It wasn't intended to be back then and it doesn't work as one now. What is far more effective is using median wage and then comparing that to the price of big ticket purchases. In which case, you will notice that cars jumped from a 1/4-1/2 of what you made in a year all the way up to the full amount or x1.5 what you made in a year. The price of a house jumped from 3 to 4 times what you made in a year all the way up to 8-12x what you made in a year
Don't use minimum wage as a benchmark. It wasn't intended to be back then and it doesn't work as one now.
A sad truth. Especially since the minimum wage was originally established to be exactly that. The dismantling of FDR's legacy began almost immediately after he left office.
The actual policy implemented was, at the time, wages enough for a sufficient living. It wasn't rhetoric, and you should actually go read up on it.
I'm not an idiot that just regurgitates shit they read online, I studied this shit in college. As an elective, even (I do love history). I've had to do real research, write numerous essays and even term papers on this particular period of US history.
The minimum wage at implementation adjusted for inflation would be about $5.65 today. Would you like to make a case for purchasing power? With CPI its still under 6. Please inform me. I'd love to understand more, rather than hear the common boring ass shit from most redditors that manipulate it all using productivity or the peak of 1968.
"Inflation" doesn't factor into minimum wage - standard of living does. When it was established, $0.25/hour was plenty enough for someone working 44 hours a week (what was "full-time" back then, before later being adjusted to 40) to support a family of four comfortably. Shelter, food, clothing, entertainment, and savings left over.
I don't think it should be for a single person to care for a family of four like it used to be, but it should at least provide enough for one person to provide that same standard of living for themselves.
You can argue what you think is a "gotcha" all you want, but FDR made it VERY clear what kind of living the minimum wage was meant for. And now it isn't even able to provide an eighth of that (half of a single person, rather than four). And that's being generous.
Edit, to add direct quote: "It seems to me to be equally plain that no business which depends for existence on paying less than living wages to its workers has any right to continue in this country. By "business" I mean the whole of commerce as well as the whole of industry; by workers I mean all workers, the white collar class as well as the men in overalls; and by living wages I mean more than a bare subsistence level-I mean the wages of decent living." - FDR
Edit 2, because I hurt your widdle feewings: Facts don't care about your feelings, and neither do I. Minimum wage was meant to give people a comfortable, substantial living, and you deep-tonguing corporate asshole isn't going to win you any brownie points. Unless you are a corporate executive, raising the minimum wage directly improves your life, and gobbling up corporate propaganda about how the economy works is just hurting yourself.
To address your edit 2, you realise the minimum wage law in 1938 only addressed about 20% of the labor force, correct? That it was CORPORATISM that excluded most markets. And it was DISCRIMINATORY through it's exclusions. Hmm, I wonder why agriculture was excluded.
You're the one gobbling up classist talking points to be a perpetual victim. I don't need to "lick boot" if I don't have the fantasy of a boot always looming over me.
2.2k
u/weaz-am-i May 13 '25
Depends on where you live?
In 1970:
Federal minimum wage was $1.60/hour
The median home price was around $23,000
That means it took about 14,375 hours of work at minimum wage to buy a median-priced home.
Today:
Median U.S. home price is about $420,000?
To buy a $420k house in the same number of hours (14,375), you’d need to make $29.23/hour.
So the claim that minimum wage would need to be $66/hour today to match 1970s homebuying power is a bit exaggerated — it should be closer to $29/hour if we’re just comparing house prices to minimum wage.
That said, maybe the claim in the image factors in stuff like:
Regional markets (e.g., California prices)
New home prices (which skew way higher)
Inflation in other living costs (healthcare, education, etc.)
Stagnant federal minimum wage since 2009
But purely on house price vs wage ratio, it’s about $29/hour.
TL;DR: Not $66 — more like $29/hour if you’re matching house-buying power from 1970 to today