this post was submitted on 19 Sep 2025
449 points (96.5% liked)
Technology
77096 readers
3985 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
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
That was from December of '21. It would be $15.69 now.
Another thread put it at 16.14 an hour.
Not surprised, I just clicked on the first inflation calculator that came up. I think it was the BLS CPI calculator.
And I only did it in dollars from December of '21 until now. Converting back to shillings, either in '21 or Dickensian times, before bringing it forward to today could result in a big difference due to the charging exchange rate between the pound and the dollar.
GODSDAMN YOU BRETTON WOODS
I'm not sure that works. There were 20 shillings to the pound.
So £0.75 a week.
This inflation calculator:
https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/monetary-policy/inflation/inflation-calculator
£75 in 1843 is equivalent to £8,310.96
So 15s then is equivalent to £83.11 a week, £4321.72 a year.
40 hour week (which is implied to be too low). ~£2.08 an hour
So if he worked over 40 hours you're talking a sub £2/hour wage. Around $2.70 in US money.
I suspect the stat relies on converting to dollars before applying inflation as GBP to USD was about 1 to 5 then instead of about 1 to 1.33
It's fun but I wouldn't want to denigrate Dickens by saying he got poverty wrong to make a political point.
I think they're actually making the opposite claim- American wages are just that fucked, rather than Dickens being wrong
I think who you’re responding to knows that and is saying while doing the math wrong makes their point better it does Dickens wrong.
I think
Unfortunately you aren't