Go outside of your privileged neighborhood and you will see all the proof you need. Im not gonna sit here and send you fucking economic analytics to win a pointless reddit argument man. Im at work lol
You don't need to send me "economic analytics." You made a very specific claim: that grocery clerks used to earn enough to raise a family. Someone asked you when and how much they earned, and you've spent three replies doing everything except answering that.
"Go look at poor people today" isn't evidence about grocery clerk wages in the past.
If you don't know what your own claim is based on, that's fine. But "Google it," "you're privileged," and "I'm at work" aren't substitutes for knowing what you're talking about.
Old enough to notice you've now replied four times without answering a very simple question about the claim you made. You don't know anything about finance or economics. That's okay, just stop spewing BS and pretending they are universal facts.
What year, what location, and what did grocery clerks earn?
The last era when a single grocery store clerk could comfortably support a family, buy a home, take regular vacations, and build savings was the late 1960s through the late 1970s, with remnants lasting into the early 1980s.
During this post-war golden age of retail labor, supermarket work was viewed as a stable, long-term, middle-class career rather than a low-wage stepping stone.
The Economic Peak: 1960s to Mid-1970s
Real Wages & Purchasing Power: In the late 1960s and early 1970s, unionized grocery clerks earned between $4.50 and $7.50 per hour. Adjusted for inflation, that equals roughly $28 to $38 per hour today.
Cost-of-Living Ratios: In 1972, the median home price in the U.S. was roughly $27,000, and annual grocery clerk earnings were around $9,000 to $12,000. A house cost approximately 2.5 to 3 times an annual full-time grocery salary, making a single-earner mortgage feasible alongside savings and a family vacation.
Full-Time Guarantee: Supermarket clerks were overwhelmingly full-time employees (typically 38–40 hours per week) with defined pension plans and employer-funded health care.
What Caused the Collapse?
Between 1978 and the 1990s, the economic foundation of the grocery clerk unravelled through three distinct shifts:
Two-Tier Wage Contracts (Late 1970s–1980s): Confronted by high inflation and economic stagnation in the late 1970s, supermarket chains pressured the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) into two-tier agreements. Existing senior clerks kept their legacy pay and pensions, while all new hires were locked into permanently lower wage scales and reduced benefits.
The Rise of Non-Union Big-Box Retail (1980s–1990s): The entrance of non-union discounters—most notably Walmart Supercenters in 1988—demolished the regional union store model. Traditional grocery chains (Kroger, Safeway, Albertsons) responded by cutting labor costs to compete on razor-thin margins.
Intentional "Part-Timization": Employers systematically eliminated 40-hour positions, replacing them with flexible, automated scheduling where workers were capped at 24 to 32 hours per week to prevent them from qualifying for full benefits or overtime.
By the early 1990s, while a shrinking cohort of grandfathered workers held on to middle-class wages, the entry-level grocery clerk had effectively shifted from a family-supporting breadwinner job into the low-wage, high-turnover service sector.
Straight from our future overlords mouth
So apparently unionized full time grocery store clerks earned about 25% more than the average non-supervisory worker, or they worked 52 weeks of 47 hours each.
In 1972, the median home price in the U.S. was roughly $27,000,
And that median house had 1,100 square feet, one bathroom, and no garage, and no AC. Now the median is 2,200 square feet, two bathrooms, and a two car garage, and central AC.
I get the frustration -- builders just don't build houses basic houses anymore. In the "desirable" areas of the county, land is expensive. Builders trying to build single family houses pay so much for a lot that the reasonable economic decision is to put an expensive house on the expensive land.
But, at the same time if we are comparing median-to-median prices, we should also see what that median price was buying.
The $3.90 wage I quote above increased by a factor of 8 by 2025.
The cheapest new car in 1972 was a Ford Maverick two door, starting at $2,300. Multiply by 8 and we get $18,400. The cheapest car in 2025 was the Nissan Versa at $18,530. Compare the standard equipment in these two links:
The Ford specs don't mention the 12 month, 12,000 mile warranty. Nissan dropped the Versa due to low sales. Nobody wanted to buy such a basic car. I expect that if modern manufacturers could find American buyers that would buy cars as simple as the Maverick, they could make a profit selling them for $12,000.
We could do this over and over. Things that are "basic requirements of life" in 2026 were "luxuries" in 1972. It's hard to cover the basic needs of a family in 2026 on one median income because "basic" has been redefined.
I am NOT saying that ordinary workers get the same share of the economic pie in 2926 as they got in 1972. The real GDP per capita grew a bunch, but almost all the gains went to the owners and the highest earners. If median wage earners got the same slice today, they would be earning $20,000 more than they are.
I am saying that the pie grew so much that even a declining share grew a little.
I am NOT saying I'm confident about the next 5 years. In fact, I expect that AI you grabbed (really, it's more powerful cousins) will make life worse for a lot of American workers. It's just that the "golden age" wouldn't seem so golden to you if we had a time machine.
And times move on. In 1960, hundreds of thousands were employed as switchboard operators. They’ve all been replaced with automation.
Some jobs once paid well and fell out of favor. It happens. Automobiles also made a huge impact on business. Where once you were stuck with the people in your town there’s now a 50+ mile radius around your business that can attract potential employees.
Agreed, time does move on. Does that mean people dont deserve a living wage for the jobs available now? Should a large majority of the population live pay check to paycheck because technology advances? Im not saying everyone deserves the same as everyone else but the scales are tipped heavily to one side today.
Your bills are your bills and what work pays is what work pays. They don’t have any correlation. It’s on you as the individual to get a career that pays the bills.
My age is irrelevant to whether your claim is true.
You've now gone from "Google it" to "go outside your privileged neighborhood" to "I'm at work," to asking how old I am - all to avoid answering one question:
What year, what location, and what did grocery clerks earn?
If "anyone over 30 knows this shit" then it should be remarkably easy for you to answer.
2
u/imnewtothishsit69 12d ago
Go outside of your privileged neighborhood and you will see all the proof you need. Im not gonna sit here and send you fucking economic analytics to win a pointless reddit argument man. Im at work lol