Recent income statistics[edit]
Recent trends indicate wages have stagnated and income inequality has worsened, reducing income available to middle class families:

U.S. median income ("real" or adjusted for inflation) fell from a peak of approximately $57,000 in 1999 to $52,000 in 2013, a decline of about $5,000 or 9%.[8]
U.S. employee compensation fell relative to the size of the economy (GDP) from approximately 57% in 2000 to 53% in 2013. Employee wages and salaries, a subset of total compensation, fell from 47% GDP in 2000 to 43% GDP in 2013.[9] This indicates a shift in income from workers (labor) to owners (capital).
The U.S. top 1% income group received nearly 23% of the income in 2012, versus 10% from 1950-1970, one measure of increasing income inequality.[10] To put this change into perspective, at 1979 inequality levels, each family in the bottom 80% of the income distribution would today be receiving approximately $7,000 per year more in income on average, or nearly $600 per month.[11]
Historical perspective[edit]
In 1995, 60% of American workers were labouring for real wages below previous peaks, while at the median, “real wages for nonsupervisory workers were down 13 percent from peak 1973 levels.”[12] In a study conducted in 2006 by The United States House of Representatives there were some interesting income findings that show the effects of the middle-class squeeze. According to the study, not only is real income decreasing for the middle class, but also the gap between the top wage earners and the middle earners is widening.

Between 2000 and 2005 real median household income in the United States has declined by 2.5%, falling each of the first four years of the Bush Administration, falling by as much as 2.2% annually. Overall real median income has declined since 2000, by $1,273, from $47,599 in 2000, to $46,326 in 2005.

According to the survey, working-class families headed by adults younger than 65 have seen even steeper declines. Although they had seen an increase in real median household income from 1995 to 2000 of 9%, since 2000 their income has fallen every year and a total of 5.4%. In actual money terms this correlates to a decrease of $3,000 from $55,284 to $52,287.[3]

jaynewcastle wrote:In order to compare the value of national minimum wages around the world, its essential you take the cost of living into account in each country, & I guess at some point, the average educational qualifications too of each population, & the general wealth & development of each country.

Of course nobody from a western developed nation would work for that little, but I would bet there are people in the poorest countries of Africa who would be queuing up to work for that amount of money.

I am surprised & also impressed that Cambodia does have a national minimum wage, along with other labour laws. Even the UK didn't get a national minimum wage until 15 years ago or so

Hotdigr wrote:OD, the worldwide industry standard for hospitality wages stands at around 25% of gross take ( Google it mate).
Anymore ( unless you are in a specialist industry) then you are probably paying to much. Any less, then you are paying peanuts and getting monkeys. Simple as that. I repeat - the WORLDWIDE hospitality industry standard, to get good staff, is to pay around 25% of your gross take in wages. Do you think BK is paying that in Cambodia? ( P.S, I would love to have your input in this Moody Monkey,you know the ropes in the industry as well as any one here mate)

clippy wrote:Hotel chambermaids in NYC make 16pounds an hour. about $24, more than double than in london. (because unions)

and yet the new york hotel industry survives. and yet new york teachers and welders arent quitting to go clean hotel rooms. there doesnt seem to be hyper inflation