> I agree that would be nice, it's just not possible in a free market. Is there any country where everyone lives comfortably working full time at any job?

I mean, except for historical edge cases, we have minimum wage and social welfare programs in Germany that can be used to supplement income if it's really not enough to drag you over the poverty line. While it is by no means perfect and there of course still is poverty and people requiring multiple jobs, if you work 40 hours you can rely on full social benefits, pay into your pension fund and at least live some form of life. The US isn't really a posterchild of how to treat employees w.r.t. wages, vacation, health care, ... the question of "everyone living comfortably" seems weird, of course not. How a society handles their poor/low-income earners is no black and white question, there's a huge range between giving corporations free reign and at least trying to improve living conditions for the majority of citizens.

That darn free market. If only there was some way to, idk, regulate it, or something. Unfortunately, it's an inevitable law of nature and we are helpless in the face of its wrath.

The free market doesn't leave people helpless, it empowers. With enough effort, you can do nearly anything. Additional regulation usually makes it harder for small business to operate.

Actually, let's just make the minimum wage $30/hr and everything will be great.

>I agree that would be nice, it's just not possible in a free market. Is there any country where everyone lives comfortably working full time at any job?

Yes. In my country (NL) the minimum wage, combined with a progressive tax system makes that everyone can live off one job, have health care for their family and education for their kids.

It's not luxery on minimum wage, but it works.

>Is there any country where everyone lives comfortably working full time at any job?

I was probably a bit hasty in asking this question, it's a bit silly.

That being said, I don't know if you can compare NL and US as it's population is 10x lower and as you mentioned has much higher taxes and government programs.

Also, for some reason I can't find recent poverty statistics for NL later than 2015, and I saw stats going from 11.6% to 14% which puts it fairly close to US 12.3%. I would expect given the massive social programs and minimum wage for this to be lower.

> Is there any country where everyone lives comfortably working full time at any job?

Every developed country except one. I can't believe you don't know that.

Last time I was in Australia I met a guy and his wife - they both work stacking shelves at Safeway (the very definition of minimum wage job). Not only are they paying for a house and have three kids, he has enough money for a project car (V8 something Australian) AND they fly to Bali every year for a holiday.

Yes, when you work a minimum wage full time job in a developed country you can have a very good life.

Interestingly, Australia currently has the highest minimum wage (in the world) but similar levels of poverty to the United States.

In addition, Australia has much higher taxes overall than US, but lower taxes for low-income earners.

I'm not an expert on economics by any means, but the population of the US is about 13x that of Australia and I don't know if it's possible to make a direct comparison between the two.

That's why we do comparisons per capita.

I think these issues are a lot more nuanced than that. Maybe I'm completely wrong, but it seems like diseconomies of scale could have an impact on how well the US operates and maybe requires a lot more tax dollars per capita than does Australia for the same things.

> that would be nice, it's just not possible in a free market

Source?

I mean, technically it's possible. It makes it hard because the supply of low-skilled labor is very high, and you can't bargain to be paid a higher wage for a position, if someone else is available to do it for less.

It's great that you understand how supply and demand works, but look beyond that.

At some point in the mid-term future, automation will take over enough labor that a sizeable chunk of the (educated, motivated) population won't be able to find a job at all. Supply non-zero, demand zero, ergo price zero.

In that world, should we just let people starve?

That seems like an argument for basic income or similar. The topic at hand is raising minimum wage, which could only accelerate job loss due to automation.

Raising minimum wage might reduce the number of jobs, but 100% * ~0$ < 10% * 15$.

Many companies have wages low enough that people receive significant public assistance while working full time. That’s a terrible trend, either the work is valuable enough to pay a living wage or or does not need to be done. Allowing companies to pay below living wages is simply an inefficient drain on the economy.

That's a completely different situation, and there's no telling when or if that will happen.