The Foster's Freeze team in Lemoore, California, felt "shock" as they learned of the restaurant's last-minute closure, Monday, following the state's $20 minimum wage law.
This was a government action and not a market action. As the article states, the people were happy with their pay. Now they don’t have a job and they are unhappy with their pay.
The free market already had this under control.
Everyone’s cost of living has increased post-pandemic, minimum wage need to rise. The restaurant could have raised their price as well but chose not to, either because they think their clientele can’t afford it (increased cost of living, which is what rising the minimum wage can offset), or because the market is already saturated and they’re no longer competitive.
Something/someone has to give in when there’s inequality.
The total job market is reducing. That means there will be fewer jobs. California already has higher unemployment. So they just created a worse situation for these people.
The job market for them keep getting smaller.
With the raising cost of living, the job market is going to shrink, minimum wage increase or not. It just means that the more fortunate need to pay more to those who are less fortunate if they want to employ someone.
The market obviously can’t regulate itself correctly and needs a little nudge if someone can’t make a living wage from a full-time job. It’s not normal for someone working their asses off full-time and still barely make ends meet and living in squalor. Someone has to give, and these employees are already giving their fair share, it’s justified to ensure they get their slice of the pie.
If they can’t afford to pay a decent wage, then that job has no reason to exist.
This was a government action and not a market action. As the article states, the people were happy with their pay. Now they don’t have a job and they are unhappy with their pay. The free market already had this under control.
Everyone’s cost of living has increased post-pandemic, minimum wage need to rise. The restaurant could have raised their price as well but chose not to, either because they think their clientele can’t afford it (increased cost of living, which is what rising the minimum wage can offset), or because the market is already saturated and they’re no longer competitive.
Something/someone has to give in when there’s inequality.
By forcing a higher wage, they just created more inequality. Now these people don’t have jobs and the total number of jobs has been reduced.
And these vacant positions elsewhere also need to pay minimum wage. It’s a temporary setback until the system adjust to the new minimum.
The total job market is reducing. That means there will be fewer jobs. California already has higher unemployment. So they just created a worse situation for these people. The job market for them keep getting smaller.
Your belief in a fair market has you blaming all the wrong people for all the wrong things.
Wages are set by supply and demand. I blame the correct person in this situation. The California government
You stand alone in your argument sir.
No, the workers blame the government as well. The government is the one who took their jobs away.
With the raising cost of living, the job market is going to shrink, minimum wage increase or not. It just means that the more fortunate need to pay more to those who are less fortunate if they want to employ someone.
The market obviously can’t regulate itself correctly and needs a little nudge if someone can’t make a living wage from a full-time job. It’s not normal for someone working their asses off full-time and still barely make ends meet and living in squalor. Someone has to give, and these employees are already giving their fair share, it’s justified to ensure they get their slice of the pie.
If they can’t afford to pay a decent wage, then that job has no reason to exist.
They were living before and now they have no money. The market was working fine.
ThE fREE mArKeT