Those jobs don't disappear just because you mandate a living wage.
It's even more of a pity because we should be investing capital in meaningful things, like biotech or space exploration or environmental progress or what-have-you, instead of on stupid things like robots and restaurant apps.
Ok, now we're getting to the root of the problem. This is argument is based off of your misunderstanding of economics. What you're missing here is this:
- Jobs are a function of demand.
- Demand is driven by consumers.
- Consumers need capital to drive demand
- The poor spend proportionately to their income much more than the wealthy.
That's the circle you need to be thinking about when you're asking yourself what the impact will be on jobs. The more you drive down living standards of the poor and middle class, the fewer jobs you will have, not the other way around.
Your superior "understanding" of economics is at odds with academic consensus and with reality.
> Consumers need capital to drive demand
Replacing five McDonalds cashiers with two cashiers, an app, and a touchscreen ordering kiosk doesn't "drive demand".
And yet, you have no counterargument.
> You'd also find that the same politicians pushing a for a minimum wage are the ones trying to address broken housing policies.
Maybe, but not in New York and not in San Francisco. It's all "restrict the supply of housing" as if the laws of supply and demand are made up — indeed, they will deny supply and demand the same way a Koch-funded lobbyist tells you we should save the planet by burning more coal.