# data[].attributes.headline
MIT's Living Wage Project gives a pretty good idea of what a living wage may/should look like in specific cities or towns.

# data[].attributes.subject
MIT's Living Wage Project gives a pretty good idea of what a living wage may/should look like in specific cities or towns.

# data[].attributes.headline
A living wage includes the cost of housing, food, healthcare, education, and also a small margin leftover for unforeseen events. This differs from the current min. wage we have today. At $7.25 an hour, one cannot support themselves living in today's economy without being fearful of when they may get their next meal or if they can make their rent/mortgage payments on time.

# data[].attributes.subject
A living wage includes the cost of housing, food, healthcare, education, and also a small margin leftover for unforeseen events. This differs from the current min. wage we have today. At $7.25 an hour, one cannot support themselves living in today's economy without being fearful of when they may get their next meal or if they can make their rent/mortgage payments on time.

# data[].attributes.headline
Therefore, we need to adapt to our new and ever-changing surroundings and figure out a better way of determining what poverty truly looks like in the 21st century in order to better determine what a living wage might look like.

# data[].attributes.subject
Therefore, we need to adapt to our new and ever-changing surroundings and figure out a better way of determining what poverty truly looks like in the 21st century in order to better determine what a living wage might look like.

# data[].attributes.headline
However, it is not an accurate gauge of what should be considered poverty in today's world. Although it accounts for inflation when considering things such as food prices, it does not account for what else might be needed to live in the 21st century. So, if you fall below the federal poverty threshold today, you are technically falling below standards from what people in 1969 would have also considered poverty. 

# data[].attributes.subject
However, it is not an accurate gauge of what should be considered poverty in today's world. Although it accounts for inflation when considering things such as food prices, it does not account for what else might be needed to live in the 21st century. So, if you fall below the federal poverty threshold today, you are technically falling below standards from what people in 1969 would have also considered poverty. 

# data[].attributes.headline
First off, we will need to come up with a new way to determine what poverty looks like. The current gauge of poverty that we utilize today is the federal poverty threshold. This was created back in 1963, but quickly the government realized that this value needed to be adjusted for inflation each year, or what they called "increases in food prices," so starting in 1969, the federal poverty threshold began accounting for inflation each year and still does to this day. 

# data[].attributes.subject
First off, we will need to come up with a new way to determine what poverty looks like. The current gauge of poverty that we utilize today is the federal poverty threshold. This was created back in 1963, but quickly the government realized that this value needed to be adjusted for inflation each year, or what they called "increases in food prices," so starting in 1969, the federal poverty threshold began accounting for inflation each year and still does to this day. 

# data[].attributes.headline
How will we be able to determine what a living wage might look like? 

# data[].attributes.subject
How will we be able to determine what a living wage might look like? 

# data[].attributes.headline
If the minimum wage had grown linearly with growth in national income per person since 1969, it would have reached $16.88 an hour in 2013, or $22.29 an hour in today's money. So, if productivity and national income per person have both increased since 1969, why is it fair that the federal min. wage has not increased alongside it?

# data[].attributes.subject
If the minimum wage had grown linearly with growth in national income per person since 1969, it would have reached $16.88 an hour in 2013, or $22.29 an hour in today's money. So, if productivity and national income per person have both increased since 1969, why is it fair that the federal min. wage has not increased alongside it?

# data[].attributes.headline
A livable wage is defined as a wage that is high enough to maintain a normal and comfortable standard of living, whereas a min. wage is simply what its name says it is: a minimum wage one must be paid. 

# data[].attributes.subject
A livable wage is defined as a wage that is high enough to maintain a normal and comfortable standard of living, whereas a min. wage is simply what its name says it is: a minimum wage one must be paid. 

# data[].attributes.headline
To support two adults and one child in an urban city such as Washington, DC, you would need to make $23.54 an hour in 2015, or $30.56 in today's money. $7.25 would not even cut it close to being enough to support yourself or much less a family even back in 2015. 

# data[].attributes.subject
To support two adults and one child in an urban city such as Washington, DC, you would need to make $23.54 an hour in 2015, or $30.56 in today's money. $7.25 would not even cut it close to being enough to support yourself or much less a family even back in 2015. 

# data[].attributes.headline
Actually, no. According to MIT's Living Wage Project, in 2015 to live in a town such as Charles Town, WV and work full-time, you would have to be paid $8.48 an hour. To support two adults and one child, that number raises to $17.18 an hour. And this was only in 2015. In today’s money, those numbers would equal $11.08 and $22.30 respectively. Charles Town, WV is also only a small town in a more rural area. 

# data[].attributes.subject
Actually, no. According to MIT's Living Wage Project, in 2015 to live in a town such as Charles Town, WV and work full-time, you would have to be paid $8.48 an hour. To support two adults and one child, that number raises to $17.18 an hour. And this was only in 2015. In today’s money, those numbers would equal $11.08 and $22.30 respectively. Charles Town, WV is also only a small town in a more rural area. 

# data[].attributes.headline
Even so, that must still be a fair and livable wage, even if it has decreased over time.

# data[].attributes.subject
Even so, that must still be a fair and livable wage, even if it has decreased over time.

# data[].attributes.headline
Adjusting for inflation, the federal min. wage has been decreasing since 1969, when it was $1.60, or $10.24 in 2015's money. In today's money, that would equal $14.15. Today, the current federal min. wage is just $7.25. 

# data[].attributes.subject
Adjusting for inflation, the federal min. wage has been decreasing since 1969, when it was $1.60, or $10.24 in 2015's money. In today's money, that would equal $14.15. Today, the current federal min. wage is just $7.25. 

# data[].attributes.headline
Yes, it should be increased; but what exactly is a living wage compared to a min. wage?

# data[].attributes.subject
Yes, it should be increased; but what exactly is a living wage compared to a min. wage?

# data[].attributes.headline
No, the federal min. wage of $7.25 is a fair and livable wage.

# data[].attributes.subject
No, the federal min. wage of $7.25 is a fair and livable wage.

# data[].attributes.headline
The federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour is not a living wage; however, it should be increased to be one.

# data[].attributes.subject
The federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour is not a living wage; however, it should be increased to be one.