[s1artibartfast]

That begs the question about what to do when the workers will accept lower wage, and there is not a more profitable business waiting to replace it.

I dont know so many people make those assumptions. If there is a more profitable buisness, why isnt it there already?

[contravariant]

If they are offered more than enough money to be willing to stay and there's not a more profitable business waiting to replace it, then what exactly is the problem?

[s1artibartfast]

in the context of the minimum wage discussion, the problem is when the labor is willing but not allowed to work, ends up unemployed instead, and the store sits vacant.

[contravariant]

And how is that related to businesses that cannot afford to pay their staff enough to keep them?

We're not discussing minimum wage here. If we were I'd point out that minimum wage should at a minimum be the amount where letting the store remain vacant is equally preferable. However to ensure alignment I consider it better to put it higher to the point where people earning minimum wage aren't a burden on society (I mean a store with as much value to society as a vacant one doesn't really deserve to exist, you're just shifting the problem there, don't ever let industry do that for you).

[s1artibartfast]

>And how is that related to businesses that cannot afford to pay their staff enough to keep them?

It was more of an addendum on the types of business that shouldnt exist, and business turnover in general. I agree that if a business cant make enough to attract talent, it makes sense that that it should fail (all other factors neglected).