This is a dishonest re-definition.
You are right; thanks for the catch. Perhaps I should use the term "income," but it is still missing the point. The idea I want to hint at is that increasing minimum wage does not automatically mean workers earn more. The standard economic objection is that minimum wage reduces employment opportunity and increases unemployment.the type of abuse that is possible by employers when/if people are very desperate for work
Would you support minimum prices on goods for sale when a business is very desperate for revenue? Do you use the term "abuse" when businesses offer very low prices? Consider that the "business" could be a single person and the "product" could be math lessons.[Minimum wage] is a restriction on employers.
It is enforced that way, but it seems clear to me that it effectively restricts both sides. It makes it illegal for workers to take jobs that pay below a certain level — in other words, from selling their assets (time, energy, talent) at certain prices.
Selling products at a loss to drive competition from the market is a common tactic. I'm not sure but I believe that's illegal in some circumstances. What I don't understand is why you believe the situations to be equivalent. A low wage is the employer harming or abusing the employee; a low price is the employer harming or abusing himself.Would you support minimum prices on goods for sale when a business is very desperate for revenue?