alt.sci.physics

Dear AngleWyrm:

"AngleWyrm" wrote in message
news:qYednd_RM9WGEl_bnZ2dnUVZ_qainZ2d@ ...
> "N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc)" wrote in message
> news: $ @ ...
>> "AngleWyrm" wrote in message
>> news:k62dncFXavkm3iHbnZ2dnUVZ_q-jnZ2d@ ...
>>> "dlzc" wrote in message
>>> news: @ ...
>
>>> In 1957 a minimum-wage $ /hr would buy one $1
>>> gallon of milk. In 2007, a $ /hr will buy almost two
>>> gallons of milk. So if all you need is milk...
>>
>>Milk was much less than a dollar in 1957. It is also
>>(in some cases) subsidized. Which is why analogies
>> suck.
>
> Here are some references that all state milk was
> $1/gallon in 1957.
> /Article/When-A-Penny-Was-Worth-More-Than-Just-Your-Thoughts/637/
> /news/releases/archives07/
> /
> /NewFiles/
>
> You are cordially invited to back up your assertion
> that the price of a gallon of milk was "much less"
> than a dollar a gallon in 1957.

Minimum wage was $ in 1957 in the US:
/ipa/

I grant your point.

Note that $4 per gallon now (not on sale) is higher than $1 per
gallon in 1957. Note also that the price of milk is subsidized,
in some cases. (Granted the $4 was perhaps a short-term local
blip...)

Now do we need to drag this point out? DId you get the drift, or
were you only seeking to find some point to argue over?

David A. Smith