[TomGuy]

This page cannot be displayed because ad blocking software has been detected.

So, according to the excerpt, students and young adults, those under age 23, do not deserve a living wage, because they are students, young adults.

Intended or not, such rationales actually advocate a double standard -- better salaries for older adults -- most of whom probably make much more than the mininum wage -- but low, minimun wage salaries for students, young adults, those under age 23---because they are students, young adults, under age 23 and the just don't deserve a living wage.

[Mr. K]

I think what he means is to let market forces do their job- Nowhere did he say that one group ‘deserves’ a ‘living wage’ or not

[PugetSoundSoldier]

Living wage, where? A living wage in Memphis, TN is a LOT lower than in Chicago, IL.

THIS is why a Federal minimum wage makes zero sense - the cost of living is NOT constant or even close to being constant across the US.

[OA5599]

It’s not that teenagers/young adults do not deserve a “living wage” or that older adults derserve better salaries. Skills & experience are what deserve better salaries. Experience and age happen to be closely correlated.

I started at less than minimum wage (training wage) as a teenager at a fast food joint. There I learned that it was not something I wanted to be stuck in for the rest of my life. After years of technical training and many years on the job, I make six figures. I don’t think it is a double standard.

[Danny Carlton]

The reason we have child labor laws is that children were treated like adults at one point and given adult jobs. the problem was that they would take less wages and were easily intimidated.

Anyone who needed a LIVING wage can go get the education and training needed to earn a living wage. But it screws up the economy to artificially inflate the wages of non-living-wage earners. It reduces purchasing power of all wage earners, thus reducing the real wages of everyone.