Think about the natural conclusion to the problem that you’re trying to address. What if we pay teenagers who don’t need the money less than everyone else. That would incentivize employers to … check notes … only hire teenagers who don’t need the money. Everyone else, who actually does need the money, they would have trouble finding a job. Facepalm.
Also. Because your teenagers are getting lucky, in that they have a family that’s paying all of their bills, you somehow wish that they weren’t getting lucky, and that some rich person was getting richer? Do I understand that correctly?
Furthermore. There might be value to your teens in working less so that they can do other things when they’re still teenagers. That might be something you would want to explore, since your family’s finances are in a solid state.
And hey, if you think your teenager is being overpaid, why don’t you encourage them to donate some of their money to charity?
In many other families, finances aren’t so strong. Maybe the parents can pay the bills, but if the kids want to go to college, they’ll have to take out student loans. Or they could start saving in high school, and use that money for college, or to get an apartment if they have to move out, or to buy a car, or whatever else they need after they graduate high school. All of a sudden the extra money sounds really important, doesn’t it.
No, I’m saying that while I agree that essentially every job should have a livable wage, I can’t. Reconcile that with a teenager’s part time job while living at home.
I’d entertain the idea of an exception to livable wages, even if it hurts my family. However I don’t see a reasonable way to apply that without affecting everyone
Think about the natural conclusion to the problem that you’re trying to address. What if we pay teenagers who don’t need the money less than everyone else. That would incentivize employers to … check notes … only hire teenagers who don’t need the money. Everyone else, who actually does need the money, they would have trouble finding a job. Facepalm.
Also. Because your teenagers are getting lucky, in that they have a family that’s paying all of their bills, you somehow wish that they weren’t getting lucky, and that some rich person was getting richer? Do I understand that correctly?
Furthermore. There might be value to your teens in working less so that they can do other things when they’re still teenagers. That might be something you would want to explore, since your family’s finances are in a solid state.
And hey, if you think your teenager is being overpaid, why don’t you encourage them to donate some of their money to charity?
In many other families, finances aren’t so strong. Maybe the parents can pay the bills, but if the kids want to go to college, they’ll have to take out student loans. Or they could start saving in high school, and use that money for college, or to get an apartment if they have to move out, or to buy a car, or whatever else they need after they graduate high school. All of a sudden the extra money sounds really important, doesn’t it.
No, I’m saying that while I agree that essentially every job should have a livable wage, I can’t. Reconcile that with a teenager’s part time job while living at home.
I’d entertain the idea of an exception to livable wages, even if it hurts my family. However I don’t see a reasonable way to apply that without affecting everyone