I think this take is a caricature of low wage employees. It’s kinda similar to the talk I occasionally hear about the enlisted ranks in the military. “That’s just for losers and dropouts” or to that effect.
My experience is that those low wage jobs can just as easily be filled with every segment of the spectrum from incredibly smart and competent to those who struggle with basic life tasks. The commonality seems to be they were all disadvantaged in some way. Maybe it was a strained family life or disability or sick relative but the necessity of them taking the job couldn’t be boiled down to something as simple as they couldn’t get their shit together
Poor people are not stupid, or unambitious, and have the same addiction rates as the rich. Of course, rich addicts go to rehab, and poor addicts are imprisoned.
When they try to work their way up at places like Walmart, and get fucked over again and again even when they are taking time off to serve in the military[1], they recognize that the system is rigged and there is no point in pretending otherwise.
There is not a single state where working full time at one minimum wage job is enough to pay for an apartment. [2] That's why more than 5 million people work more than one job. They are trying to beat the system. They want an education and a career. But our society does not provide a realistic path for them to achieve any of those goals.
[1] https://www.militarytimes.com/pay-benefits/2021/01/05/walmar...
Very few people leave poverty in the usa because of many factors that have nothing to do with welfare.
Playing devils advocate with your logic, how is this different from preventing the market from “clearing” non-viable businesses? I.e., don’t many safety net programs essentially subsidize business profits by allowing employers to lower wages?