No you haven’t.
The “General Welfare” clause doesn’t have anything to do with the minimum wage.
Have you ever taken a class?
From your own cite:
Bolding mine.
Do you have a cite that people are starving to death in the United States?
So you find it acceptable?
Stop misrepresenting my statements, please.
The price the company pays for the service it is buying is not decreased by the subsidy the worker receives. Or doesn’t receive, as is the case for many minimum wage workers.
So the primary benefit to the employer is zero. The secondary effects may include increasing the price point at which the marginal worker will join the workplace, but I’m not convinced about that yet. If true, government subsidies to workers will make labor more expensive for businesses.
I’m not. You don’t feel it’s a problem.
Malnutrition is a lack of adequate intake of nutrients regardless if enough calories are consumed. You don’t see this as a problem.
I dont think it a problem that is dealt with by an increased minimum wage. I assume most of this 1% are the kids of parents with drug abuse issues, or whose parents have mental health issues. 1% really is a small percentage in the great scheme of things. I can’t guarantee that every one of this 1% have fucked up parents, but im fairly sure most of them shall have parents who are less than adequate.
But we can write laws to compel business owners, as the Founders intended.
And that’s a reason to ignore it?
And throwing more money at irresponsible parents is going to solve that problem?
How do you know that it’s the children of minimum-wage workers who are undernourished?
Where did you people get this idea that society owes a certain “standard of living” to everyone? Minimum wage was never intended to guarantee any standard of living.
Why is “living within your means” suddenly an evil concept? If you’re poor, then live like it! Be frugal, don’t expect luxuries like cable tv, smartphones, snack foods, etc, etc.
Work hard and get a better job that pays more if you want a better life!
Which is roughly 7.7% living in poverty have drug problems.
No, but it is a reason not to implement a policy that will in no meaningful way alleviate the problem. Fucked up parents who indulge in fucked up parenting will produce fucked up kids. A minimum wage of $25 per hour will not change this one iota.
Actually, it was. When FDR proposed the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, he specifically said workers have a right to a decent living, not just a subsistence wages:
Congress agreed, and his vision became law.
The minimum wage went 10 years without a raise while cost of living rose.
Not everyone is capable or has i the inherent skills/talents to rise far. Why do you think there’s 1 CEO and 100,000 workers?
Do you believe everyone can rise to the top?
if you magically made everyone a genius with a PhD, who’s going to do the scut work? Will you pay them a wage in line with their educational achievements?
Why can only a few people play pro sports if all you need is hard work and no talent?
Do you believe that everyone in the country can become President?
What do you do with the people at the low end of the curve? They don’t deserve a basic income? Did you ever think they may be working as hard as they can and it’s barely enough to stay afloat?
Another poster wrote the following in another thread:
I’ll ask the same about those with physical or intellectual deficits, not that I’m equating everyone here.
Assuming the answer to the question is not “let them rot in the gutters,” the next question is what to do. Given that the sets of people making MW and those living in a way we find inadequate overlap poorly, I am leaning more toward other solutions.
You don’t know how I feel or see. Again, please stop assigning motives to me.
Malnutrition doesn’t equal starvation, btw.
Not based on the Preamble, we can’t.
So you don’t believe there’s any damage? Or do you just not give a shit?
No, they don’t. They “deserve” whatever they earn. Working for a living is not a new concept.