This assumes that there’s an infinite supply of well paying jobs that are freely accessible to everyone, but that’s not how reality works. If the options are “work for shit pay” or “don’t work at all and starve” then people will choose the shit job. It’s why market economies aim for a few percents unemployment(and why places like the US really don’t want to forgive student debt) because people need to be desperate for whatever job they can get to keep wages low.
A much better way to solve it is just to legislate that if you work a fulltime job you have to be paid a livable wage.
This isn’t assuming shit. the problem is people don’t collectively deny labor to jobs that don’t pay a high enough wage. They’re selfinterested and will take offers that are detrimental to the whole system because it gives them any amount of return. It’s literally about collective bargaining, or at least refusing to negotiate for anything less than the bare necessities
So in essence you just want to ban employers from being able to offer poverty wages.
Doesn’t that mean even more people would be out of a job as the jobs paying poverty wages disappear? They won’t pay more, they’re way more likely to close up shop.
Should a business that relies on poverty wages stay open? It seems to me that if you can’t afford to pay your employees a living wage then you shouldn’t be in business since your business is clearly not viable. It’s like all these food delivery apps that popped up the last few years. They rely on venture capital and underpaying their “employees” to bring the price down. But eventually they’ll be asked to make a profit and the prices will go up. I don’t think people will keep on ordering in the same quantities when the delivery fees doubles or tripples, the bussinesses are just unsustainable and if you believe in market economies then they should be allowed to fail.
This assumes that there’s an infinite supply of well paying jobs that are freely accessible to everyone, but that’s not how reality works. If the options are “work for shit pay” or “don’t work at all and starve” then people will choose the shit job. It’s why market economies aim for a few percents unemployment(and why places like the US really don’t want to forgive student debt) because people need to be desperate for whatever job they can get to keep wages low.
A much better way to solve it is just to legislate that if you work a fulltime job you have to be paid a livable wage.
This isn’t assuming shit. the problem is people don’t collectively deny labor to jobs that don’t pay a high enough wage. They’re selfinterested and will take offers that are detrimental to the whole system because it gives them any amount of return. It’s literally about collective bargaining, or at least refusing to negotiate for anything less than the bare necessities
So in essence you just want to ban employers from being able to offer poverty wages.
Doesn’t that mean even more people would be out of a job as the jobs paying poverty wages disappear? They won’t pay more, they’re way more likely to close up shop.
Should a business that relies on poverty wages stay open? It seems to me that if you can’t afford to pay your employees a living wage then you shouldn’t be in business since your business is clearly not viable. It’s like all these food delivery apps that popped up the last few years. They rely on venture capital and underpaying their “employees” to bring the price down. But eventually they’ll be asked to make a profit and the prices will go up. I don’t think people will keep on ordering in the same quantities when the delivery fees doubles or tripples, the bussinesses are just unsustainable and if you believe in market economies then they should be allowed to fail.