That's exactly why. Because minimum wage puts a floor on the 'bottom' that's being raced to. Otherwise, people would be earning considerably less than the current minimum wage, because the 'bottom' would be even lower.

The question was sarcastic (poor form, I know). More than 90% of workers earn above minimum wage, despite this supposedly inevitable race to the bottom.

Check out how many earn more than 150% of the minimum wage. Otherwise it's still minimum wage driven.

Or maybe the minimum wage is driven by real wages. Or maybe they're both by a common factor - like inflation.

Hmmm... I would say 100% of workers should earn above minimum wage, that's the whole point of the law. Right?

Well, the point of the law is to have all workers earning at least minimum wage, not necessarily above.

Every full-time job is 40 hours, which is the maximum allowed without having to pay overtime.

I think it's fair to assume companies will do anything for increased productivity. That has nothing to do with wages.

> Every full-time job is 40 hours, which is the maximum allowed without having to pay overtime.

Categorically false. I'd wager 90%+ of the (American) readers here are exempt FTEs, meaning they are paid a salary which is based on calendar days/weeks/months/year, not hours worked.

Full-time means nothing more than 40-hour week. Your logic is self-referential.

Very few jobs offer 35- or 30-hour weeks (which would still be called full-time). There are part-time jobs that have much shorter hours, or often no contractual hours, but they're a different thing.

No, but it's why people with H1-B visas aren't the highest earners in technology.