So then the next question is: who should be responsible for providing the quality of life floor? We as a society (rightly) demand a minimum standard of living

So then the next question is: who should be responsible for providing the quality of life floor? We as a society (rightly) demand a minimum standard of living for everyone, and we collectively pay for that one way or the other. Either we pay taxes to fund a welfare state (single payer healthcare, UBI, food stamps), or we pay inflated prices for goods and services to maintain wage floors. I'd argue that paying taxes for welfare is more progressive, as the burden falls on richer people. Paying inflated prices for goods and services is regressive as it's a burden that falls equally on the rich and the poor. What we're clearly seeing is a well functioning market driving down the cost of driver labor to the minimum possible price (ignoring for a moment the need to make sure externalities are included in the price via congestion taxes). This is good for consumers, since the good/service is now accessible to people lower on the socioeconomic ladder. If the problem is that some of these drivers aren't making enough to survive, then wouldn't a more optimum solution be to simply give them a little bit of money (or in-kind services)?