• ThatWeirdGuy1001@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    I mean the minimum in minimum wage is meant to be the absolute minimum wage necessary to balance cost of living.

    If cost of living goes up then so should the minimum wage.

    What I understand the least is how businesses need to pay for resources to make their products yet for some reason human workers aren’t considered resources and therefore aren’t treated as part of the cost of owning a business.

    If you can’t make a profit while paying a living wage looks like you don’t get to own that business ¯⁠\⁠_⁠(⁠ツ⁠)⁠_⁠/⁠¯

    • marcos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      The “minimum” in “minimum wage” literally means that nobody can pay you less.

      It has no etymological relation to the cost of living.

    • Zess@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      I’m just saying a 2br apartment in NYC is a lot more than one in Nowhere, Kansas.

      • Sludgeyy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        Cost of living in NY > Cost of living in Nowhere, Kansas

        Minimum wage of NY > Minimum wage of Nowhere, Kansas

        This has nothing to do with what minimum wage should afford

        I don’t agree with OP. We shouldn’t be striving to get people to work minimum wage. The minimum should be minimum. 2 BR is not minimum.

        Now I’m all for a Basic Minimum Income. And if you need 2 BR and your low paying job isn’t enough, the BMI should cover it.

        But this idea that the lowest working class needs to receive “minimum wage” is false. They need to receive fair pay, not the minimum the company is required to give them.