> Goldman Sachs doesn't get hurt by a minimum wage, but small business owners, such as those running a convenience store, do. Goldman Sachs is a red herring in

> Goldman Sachs doesn't get hurt by a minimum wage, but small business owners, such as those running a convenience store, do. Goldman Sachs is a red herring in this argument. The ones hurt most are the very poor who never have a chance to own such a business to begin with. And a business model that relies on cheap labor is not one that should be ethically allowed to exist in modern society IMO. Also as the sibling comment points out, all of society loses when business underpays it's employees and they are forced to permanently rely on transfer payments to make ends meet. A minimum wage is the best way to use market mechanisms to eliminate poverty via an improved alignment of incentives. Businesses invest in additional capital to make labor more productive due to it's increased inherent cost. More productive labor can in turn charge higher rates. Which translates into higher total demand, which begets more investment and growth. There are also ancillary benefits as well, many anti-immigration supporters (inaccurately) point to stagnating wages as a negative result of present immigration policy. A boost in minimum wages would take that rhetorical sleight-of-hand away from them.