Hacker News Reader

Comment by jmcdiesel | Hacker News Reader

When you can explain to me why you SHOULD be able to make a full living wage putting books on a shelf, or pouring coffee, or putting hamburgers in a bag, you can claim it as a terrible salary.

View on HN

Because otherwise these people will use our welfare system to subsidize their job. Basically, the choice we make when we choose to require a living wage for those jobs is that we want the business owner and their customers to find a way to pay for their business model, rather than us subsidizing it indirectly through means-tested welfare.

So the people that lose their jobs because of this suddenly need less subsidizing? Its become expected now... with min wage hikes, that businesses are turning to automation and cutting jobs... thats becoming the norm. Those people who now lost their jobs, you feel, are less of a burden?

I don't recall that happening in Seattle when we raised our minimum wage. Stuff got a little more expensive, but there weren't mass layoffs like you're suggesting. If it's there it's too subtle for us to argue from the seat of our pants.

I don't think anyone needs to defend the idea that working 2,000 hours per year "should" earn someone a living wage.

How about this: If your business can't afford to pay a "full living wage" for a full time job you "shouldn't" be in business.

Sounds good. Then eliminate welfare of any kind for anyone who's working a full-time job, because, by definition, they're making a "full living wage", and don't need additional assistance. I'm legitimately curious what things would look like when a new equilibrium is established. Which industries were destroyed, which arose, and which pivoted? What happened to the people who worked for the unsustainable businesses?

The wages paid are typically good enough for a single person to live. It's not good enough to support any dependants though.

Why are you measuring effort that goes into a job and not it's utility to other people? Wasting effort on things that people don't value doesn't make you automatically deserve anything.

Let's not get ahead of ourselves. We're talking on a forum where guys can get paid $100k+ to play table tennis and hammer out basic cookie-cutter web apps.

It's kinda alarming the disdain you're showing for service workers, I really hope you're trolling

Its not disdain... its a recognition of effort. Most of us with 100k+ jobs, have put in the time, went to school, gained experience... etc...

The last time I worked minimum wage I was 16... because I decided pretty quick i wanted to do better than minimum wage...

Nobody is forced to work a minimum wage job... it might be hard, but it can be worked out of... but there its difficult so most dont even attempt it

So minimum wage is meant to be like a stick to beat the poors, who just don't try hard enough? Got it

No, that kind of logic is a strawman...

You earn your effort. You _EARN_ your wage. If you work less, if you put in less effort, if you give less... you get less in return. Its balance. Its equilibrium... without it, with more people taking more than they are giving out, you end up with bad. Bad all around... giving more to people who put in less effort solves nothing

Reply on news.ycombinator.com