It's not an unreasonable wage considering the cost of living in most places in the America.
Average apartment rent is $1500 a month, bills when factoring in phone and internet costs usually come out to $200 or more a month, groceries on average $300 a month. And that does no factor in the costs of transportation, clothing costs, and other necessities that are required to get through the average month.
So, if you figure that $2000 is the average cost of base living expenses and a $15 an hour minimum wage working 40 hours a week comes out to a grand total of $2400 a month or an income of $28,000 a year.
Think about that $28,000 a year when your monthly costs average $2000 a year, leaves $8000 a year to cover other expenses such as child care, education, vehicle costs (which according to AAA is roughly 700 a month is insurance, fuel, and maintenance) then $28,000 a year just barely covers the costs of housing, food, and transportation for a single worker without dependence.
One of the big arguments that people have been throwing arounds that if $15 an hour became the new minimum then there would simply be a cutting back of jobs.
To which I say fine.
Let's look at this from a family stand point.
Currently it takes two incomes bringing in over $50,000 a year to cover basic costs for themselves and a, singular, child. That's still requiring both individuals to work full time or more at an average of $15 or more.
Two full time workers at $15 an hour to raise a child and that doesn't even realistically cover the costs of child care for those parents to be able to work full time. Usually for a family raising a child you need a singular income of $50,000 so that one person can work part time to cover child care and supplement their own time and energy to cover the costs.
So, the argument is that there would be fewer jobs because of how expensive it would be to employee people at a $15 an hour minimum wage is arguably moot.
From the less jobs stand point most people living or working on minimum wage are having to piece together two or three jobs plus side gigs just to pay the bills. If they only had to work one job and be able to pay the bills I don't think they'll complain too much about one of their three jobs not being there anymore.
Let alone those living on fixed incomes needing to continue to work would be able to work less in order to maintain basic standards of living and better address the issues that have them living on a fixed income to begin with. .
From the stand point of small business, yes, there would be what would feel like an exponential rise in the operating costs of employees. However, if small businesses were offered tax incentives for maintaining employees rather than being charged to have employees there could be some work arounds done.
I'd also argue that small business employment could be a supplemented by unemployment programs through application to a program similar to the PPP program used during the pandemic. So that if a small business (10 or fewer employees) is unable to cover the cost of those employees after all of the over head is paid. ( or maximum of $280,000 + operating costs) then the salary of those employees could be supplemented through unemployment benefits and allowing the small business the ability to get through applicable financial hardships like pandemics, catastrophes, or dissolvements but protect the employees incomes for the work they are doing.
The other thing that people don't consider about minimum wage work is that if minimum wage were in fact livable many of the tax supplemented low income programs would see a huge drop in need and operating costs.
Raising the minimum wage isn't an argument of how it will impact a flagging economy. Raising the minimum wage is a reflection of the rise in costs and life with dignity.
The short of it is, if the minimum standard of working is not capable of offering a worker to to do with dignity then is it really a standard at all?