Greentext

4751 readers

2249 users here now

This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.

Be warned:

Anon is often crazy.
Anon is often depressed.
Anon frequently shares thoughts that are immature, offensive, or incomprehensible.

If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

Early_To_Risa@sh.itjust.works

433

Anon gets a job (sh.itjust.works)

submitted 2 days ago by Early_To_Risa@sh.itjust.works to c/greentext@sh.itjust.works

91 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 1 points 22 hours ago

My state has no minimum wage, so we inherit the federal minimum wage ($7.25 IIRC), yet starting wages tend to be $10-12 in my suburb (probably higher closer to downtown) and median is $13 for fast food.

Yeah, companies will probably try to reduce wages, especially if those wages are essentially subsidized by NIT. But at least in my area, that would only happen if worker supply increases (in this case from people quitting worse jobs). Since almost nobody actually works for minimum wage here, I don't think that's a major concern.

On net, workers would probably be better off. I think we'd see a bit more intentional unemployment, which should drive wages up instead of down.

The main people who would lose out are middle class people relying on Social Security for retirement. We could balance that by removing the income cap on Social Security to preserve some traditional benefit for retirees (I propose income caps for benefits).