For as long as high unemployment results in a lack of competition for labour, and for as long as welfare is insufficient to cover a person's needs, people are o

For as long as high unemployment results in a lack of competition for labour, and for as long as welfare is insufficient to cover a person's needs, people are obligated to take whatever employment is available. People are obligated to take employment even if that's at a far lower wage than the value of what they are offering. I am satisfied to describe this type of employment as exploitation. If a corporation makes an increased profit only by using the fact that its employees are in a very poor negotiating position and cannot refuse employer demands, I would be satisfied to call that unethical. Normally, people would call sweatshops unethical - on the same basis. I believe that corporations and already-wealthy shareholders both shoulder moral responsibility for that. Current economic conditions have converged to a point where [minimum wage] employees have almost zero negotiating position. I agree with you that this needs to be better addressed by politicians - partly, but not only, in the tax/benefit system - but I don't observe that it is being addressed.