I can agree that your right

My problem with minimum wage is that, genereally speaking, if you set a bar, people will rise exactly to the level of that bar

But just becuase your right about that does not mean we should lose the minimum wage

If you go to get a brand new job right now, changes are they will offer you exactly minimum wage

large spikes in social program spending also coincides with large spikes in unemployment

The minimum wage has inflated our dollar to a point where without it, we would be screwed

We would all starve

I think that is hyperbolic

Actually he has a point

Also, if a low pay means that someone is exploiting someone else, wouldn't that mean that everybody could be the "exploiter"?

And if everybody is "the exploiter" who is exploiting whom?

There is no exploitation. The wages simply reflect the relative value of the job in the given market.

Society will crumble at its knees

The whole talk of "exploitation" is infantile nonsense.

Mass rioting, murder

low negoiated pay is the workers fault, low average sector pay is social engineering

Theft

Huh?

Starvation

No, if labor is cheap, that means that YOU can also employ someone cheaply.

and using social engineering to artifically deflate wages is exploitation

I think he is just being hyperbolic at this point

Why would that lead to starvation?

Yeah but employing cheaply is not selling cheaply

If labor was cheap, and you needed someone for the harvest, that would also mean that YOU can employ someone cheaply.

Food would be the same

No one could buy

We would die

In fact, one factor in raising the cost of labor is that employers tend to hire fewer people and automate more.

in fact, diluting the job market is the entire reason for the left's so called diversity desire

With a lower cost of labor, they tend to provide more services. And who do those services go to? Other people.

So the value produced by a falling cost of labor does not simply "evaporate"

if they force women to take tech sector jobs, they double their labor pool.. and reduce their cost of labor

It dosn't simply disappear. It stays in the economy.

There is no such dynamic is "exploiter" and "exploited" in a free market.

Except we would see way to many problems before it corrects itself

If two peopel engage in a trade, it is because it is beneficial to both.

it's not for women's sake that they want women to take those jobs. It's purely self interest to dilute the market with as many people as possible

I mean sure do your thing

Both parties end up richer after the transaction.

You will see that I'm right