I get the whole moral argument (which is specious IMO when u consider the point I made about customers being allowed to shop in order to get the most for their money, yet business owners aren't looked at in the same way)
ultimately the underlined is what the point of this debate is tho, right?
some low wage jobs were never structured in the 1st place to pay a "living wage"
how is that a bad thing when the original point was to give some kids job experience and a couple of dollars to buy teenager shit?
now because we have an economy that has adults working jobs that were never made to sustain a lifestyle on, all of a sudden MW is the problem?
what about adults taking responsibility for themselves? what about the customers who constantly want more cheaper goods/services, but they act like it's only the company's responsibility to look out for workers? Businesses only provide what customers seek..............so how is increasing MW a solution when customers are getting exactly what they ask for?
businesses are morally obligated to care for workers, but customers aren't? and we are supposed to blame the capitalistic system for that? no one is forced to be greedy when participating in capitalism IMO..........that's a larger cultural issue that is not being addressed
business owners aren't looked at in the same way because they can't be relied on to act ethically or accountably without regulation. that, and workers and customers make up a far more massive collection of society who happen to be at the dependent mercy of business (regarding their personal survival). in any case, if customers have the benefit of shopping around for the best bang for their buck, business owners have options themselves in deciding whose services to utilize, what assets to buy, how contracts should be structured, who they hire, what loop hole they can exploit etc.
the original point of low wage and part time work was to benefit profit margins. period. framing it in the empathetic sense of wanting to provide teens with job experience is just buttering up the cynical reality. might as well claim exploiting child labour for peanuts, as was the case generations ago, was a way of providing kids with early discipline and giving them enough pocket change to buy some bubble gum. they just offered the role for whoever might be willing or desperate enough to take them.
so, why are adults working these jobs that supposedly weren't made for them? it's either because they're content with the pay (but would understandably be attracted to the prospect of raises) or their dearth of skills has seen them reach their limit of employability. i'll say it again, this circumstance isn't always a matter of the deadbeat who slacked off in life in spite of an otherwise decent upbringing. some people are dealt all the wrong cards in life. in my experience, many if not most low skilled workers in big cities are immigrants. they're trying the best they can with what little they have. no civilized society should unequivocally cast doubt on the veracity of circumstances beyond one's control. "fuck you, try harder" is as privileged a statement as it gets.
plus, it's even less accurate to mention adults are now working these sorts of jobs as if they're purely at fault for straying off an idealized hardworking and ambitious path when many companies hire gig workers and migrant workers - most of whom are adults - precisely to avoid paying MW. they service both the everyday opportunist and the desperate. Not merely the teen with their eyes on the latest jordans.
i don't see why you're hung up on customers wanting sales and discounts. it's not like hordes of angry and entitled customers are forcing a companies hand. that's not how the dynamic works. the reason customers clamour for deals is because companies themselves offer them to make profit and avoid waste (like surplus or items near expiration or out of season). it's mutually beneficial. i can whine and complain all i want about the monopoly of cellphone carriers jacking up prices in my country but no amount of begging for discounts is going to do shit. they have the upper hand.
I don't understand the correlation you've brought up about MW and customers. do you mean that if customers were to pay more for their goods instead of seeking out lower prices then more money would go back to these businesses.. which in turn would let the extra profit trickle down to employees? if so, that's categorically false. Amazon regularly brings in billions more quarterly with no intentions of even unionizing. if a multi billion dollar corporation making disgusting amounts of wealth wont turnover profits to employees, will a humble SB? you fail to consider that these customers are also these same workers who are paid poorly. anyone with lacking income will try to secure a good deal. by your logic, these same workers are hurting themselves buying cheap goods, yet cheap goods provided by these same companies is what is incentivized to anyone facing financial hardship and trying to make ends meet. that's a catch 22.
Greed is a natural human trait but as with many impressionable traits its strength, pervasiveness and impact can be depressed or amplified by the systems and environments we're subject to. I think a system built on profit driven interests and w/o moral obligation to society is inherently compelled to selfish, individualist impulses towards power and control which goes hand in hand with the want for ever more aka greed. i've seen enough examples of capitalists rewarding selfishness, exploitation, backstabbing, criminality, coercion and greed to know what's up. power open the door to control, control opens the door to corruption.
let me finally make one thing clear... MW is necessary, up to a point. there's a reason over 90 percent of all countries have some form of collective bargaining for MW. these laws go back over a hundred years. just as there was reason for government to outlaw child labour, you can't expect a totally deregulated free market to feel obligated to champion what's ethical.