[amflare]

Absolutely not. Compensation should reflect value received. This idea effectively forces a business to subsidize their employees, because you damn sure can't pass all that to the customer (because then we are just back where we started, just with an extra 0 on every transaction). Small businesses and business with low profit margins will be forced out of business. And this would consolidate capital into the hands of the big businesses and billionaires who can afford to pay everyone tens of thousands of dollars more than they can bring into the company.

A McDonald's cashier is not worth $55,000 just because they are >18 years old. That position is not supposed to be a career. That position is supposed to be a first job for a dumb 16 year old who needs gas money and $500 for a PS5. When their needs outgrow their paycheck, they are supposed to move to a job that pays more. Can McDonalds afford to pay the extra? Sure. But Jimmy's Hotdog Stand down the street can't, so he goes out of business and the money he would have made goes to McDonald's instead and the rich get richer.

[dontlikeyoueith]

> Small businesses and business with low profit margins will be forced out of business.

Bad businesses that don't create enough value to justify their existence will be forced out of business.

That's a good thing.

[maerF0x0]

I agree with you about the latter half of the sentence. But no business should be punished simply for being small.

I'd go so far as to say we should create laws that err on the side of "slightly favor the little guy" because, as I think we all know, big businesses have armies of lawyers, PR firms, and PACs that bend reality to their whims, whereas little ones mostly do not (though in theory they could band together for the same goal it's unlikely to happen if only for administrative issues).