this post was submitted on 05 Dec 2025
450 points (95.5% liked)
Microblog Memes
9797 readers
863 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
- Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.
Related communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
First off, $27,574 is $13.25 per hour, assuming the standard salary 40 hour weeks or $15.15 assuming hourly employee's standard 35 hour work week. This got me thinking: if kingreggieisreal got simple division wrong, what else did they get wrong...
Keeping in mind that conversion rate records from the time are lacking, from what we can surmise, in 1843 (when this story took place), a week's 15 shillings (£0.75) was worth about £110.90 today ($147.84 US). This would be about £5,766.8 per year ($7,688.76 US), or £2.77 per hour ($3.70 US) assuming 40-hour weeks, or £3.17 per hour ($4.22 US) assuming 35-hour weeks.
I'm not really sure what maths kingreggieisreal is using, but it seems flawed.
Methematics.
I grew up in America and the standard work week is a full 40, so there's that. Can't help you with the inflation adjustments though.
I'm up at fucking 4am talking about payroll math. Still neurotypical tho.
Makes me wonder how long ago that was posted on the twitters or whatever. If that post was from some time when the wage/CoL ratio was better, the math almost maths by thinking a shilling is a quarter instead of a nickle.