Here’s a pair of questions for supporters of “living wage” laws, or at least for those more knowledgeable about them than I am.
If the minimum wage should be a living wage, i.e., if it should be high enough that a full-time employee could reasonably survive on it alone, then by implication aren’t you saying that if people can’t support themselves, they shouldn’t have jobs at all?
If not, then what’s the distinction between “the law should require that full-time employees be paid enough to support themselves” and “if you can’t support yourself, you should not be legally permitted to have a job”?
(I don’t think I pulled a switcheroo here, or set up a straw man, or employed any other sort of rhetorical trickery. If I did, feel free to call it out, and then answer my questions anyways.)