>>10207173it's obviously greed but even if the government was offering me the welfare bonus i wouldn't take it for multiple reasons
like one of the arguments being made is that
>raising the low-income price of labor isn't badbut even if this was a pure white society (and it's not, low-income workers are very much diverse) it's not a good idea
like consider that creating a job requires an investment of $X dollars, which is a lot, and it pays $Y dollars to the worker and provides $Z profit
if $Y is raised to a point where $Z is negative or zero, the employer is going to think "why the fuck am i investing $X into this to get no yield or pay money? i could earn more doing the work myself" and then a job disappears because it is permanently too costly to create
but even if $Z is a low amount, the employer still would not consider it a good investment for $X. there's a threshold where it becomes worthwhile to tie up that much money into something, so profit is necessary for a capitalist enterprise. so your workers can't earn so much or otherwise the jobs just disappear
but in REAL reality, when you raise the cost of labor so much, it either gets outsourced to cheaper areas or you get major inflation as consumer goods rise in price as people can buy more of them. and now you just have more poor people and a lot more hyper rich people. for this reason trying to play with the monetary supply and put your hand into the market to try and force it to be "right" just causes even more problems, and we just did exactly that with welfare that provides over the median american wage at minimum
