> It's not better to have people have no jobs and require 100% assistance It is actually. Former employees are free to learn new skills or do charity instead o

> It's not better to have people have no jobs and require 100% assistance It is actually. Former employees are free to learn new skills or do charity instead of being busy surviving a game they can’t win. You are also subsidising an economically wasteful activity that cannot cover its own true costs - if fast food joint can’t pay a wage, it does not cover the negative externalities from extra traffic on the road, carbon emissions and people getting fat. Business will be forced to innovate and invest in automation