Everyone is employable at some wage, so I favor eliminating or at least reducing the minimum wage.
Umm. The minimum wage is already below a living wage in many or nearly all places, so I'm not sure what you're advocating here (or are you just trolling, given the glib statement and lack of detail around why this is a good idea?). Are you saying that people with IQs less than 100 should work 80 hours a week and live 4 to a small apartment just so they can pay their rent? That people who suffer from too little income to feed themselves properly should accept their situations because of the circumstances of their births?
There is a huge difference between acknowledging that differences in talent exist and deciding that those who don't meet an arbitrary cutoff should be treated as though they're worthless (or nearly so, given that they'd get paid at least something).
Why is it that, among developed nations, this problem seems to affect mainly the US? Most people in, say, western Europe manage to earn living wages in spite of whatever their IQs might be. Those societies are all doing well and manage to have better schools, medical care, and infrastructure than we do. Our society's ruthlessness doesn't benefit us as a whole nation. Now that I think about it, it's possible that the everyone-must-attend-college idea could be, in part, a response to societal ruthlessness and an extreme me-first/who-cares-about-you attitude we have here in the US.
Raising the minimum wage tends to reduce employment, and it's better for both the individual and society for someone to work for $5 an hour than not to work at all. Someone who starts at a low wage may see wage increases as he becomes more productive at his job and/or establishes that he is reliable and trustworthy. But first he needs to get the job.
You call America "ruthless", but it is already spending a lot of money on Medicaid, food stamps, WIC, housing subsidies, free school lunches (and in some places, breakfasts) and on age-related entitlements such Medicare and Social Security. The European welfare state is even more lavish than ours, and even more unsustainable. Several governments in Europe -- Ireland, Greece, and Portugal -- are unable to pay their debts.
If you heavily subsidize the children of the poor through the programs listed above, that encourages them to have more children they cannot support. If affluent families have much of their income taxed away to pay for all these programs, they will be able to afford fewer children. Over time, these effects
will reduce average intelligence.
Your profile says you live in California. Your state is bankrupt, and its various policies that drive up employment costs, including a minimum wage of $8.00 about 10% higher than the Federal minimum wage of $7.25, is causing many businesses to flee to lower-cost states such as Texas.
Your vision of a compassionate society requires much higher taxes than Americans are currently paying. There is little sign they are willing to do so. I am not.
I am a Republican, I'll guess you are a Democrat. The debate over the size of government is not going to resolved on this forum, but it is obnoxious for you to freely express your political views but call other people trolls because they express different views.
Same exact idea.