[hybrid]

That would depend on what each is charging. Which means that the poor guy gets screwed by minimum wage laws since they limit his ability to compete by offering a lower price.

Dude, you are missing the point. Minimum wage is not living wage these days. It has not kept up with inflation. Offering LESS money than minimum wage is not going to enable any of the poor to dig out of their hole. He can't 'compete' because nobody WANTS him to compete. Nobody WANTS to see the guy with the ugly shoes and badly fitting suit in their office. He will never be able to compete for an office job. And an office job is, quite literally, one of the few areas where you can possibly move up and earn a decent living. Manufacturing? dying. moving. Farming? Not viable in most areas; land is too expensive. Labor? mostly operating machines these days, far more limited.

So what should they do?

[ThinkDifferent]

Minimum wage is not living wage these days.

"Living wage" is a meaningless term.

Offering LESS money than minimum wage is not going to enable any of the poor to dig out of their hole.

By my math, $5/hour is better than $0/hour.

He can't 'compete' because nobody WANTS him to compete. Nobody WANTS to see the guy with the ugly shoes and badly fitting suit in their office.

Again, you're negating your own argument. In your scenario where the poor guy is so repellent that nobody will hire him at any wage, then he's screwed regardless of the minimum wage. In the more likely case where he does actually have some value, he still can't get hired if that value is less than the minimum wage.