aww... have you come to the shocking realization that running a business isnt a charity?

I would have to wonder about all this, because you see from ample examples today, and in the past, that you will have people doing hours, months and years of work without getting paid, for a number of reasons.  You have people trying for fame.  You have examples on the Internet now.  And you have situations where people bag groceries in Mexico for merely tips.  Heck, if you factor in college internships, there are people who actually pay money to do a job.  And businesses will exploit this also to make the students doing the intern get coffee and other grunt work, that has nothing to do with what they are majoring in.  It actually gets bad sometimes to where colleges have to crack down on it.

A question is, left to its own devices, could a market produce a form of a hell where people work their entire lives for no pay in an area, provide value and don't get compensated.  I see this form happening on the Internet.  I mentioned Second Life is full of this.  You have people on there paying money to run businesses, and not existing.  Cost to stay afloat is so low, people will do this indefinitely, if they can.  And then you have the porn industry also, getting killed now financially, because free porn is running amok.  Used to be you had to pay people for this.  Then you find that people will actually do it for free, because doing it is a reward unto itself.  And, does anyone here not think Game Stop couldn't get away with paying people pennies per hour, if that, if there wasn't a minimum wage law?  They don't have problems staffing, because they get videogame fanboys there, who would even pay money to convert people to their system of choice.

Only thing that stops this cycle is the labor pool does the equivalent of striking, and refuses to do things unless compensated somehow.  A question here I would ask: Is it going to get to a place where most jobs could be such where business owners wouldn't even have to pay people enough to live, because the pool of labor is large enough to allow them to not do this?  Maybe it wouldn't be totally so, but it could be that it happens in increasingly large numbers.

That really sucks man. Sorry to hear that. 

I don't blame the employer though man, I think it's the government's fault you don't have a job. If there wasn't a minimum wage then the business could pay you a fair/competitive market wage for your services, instead of being forced to pay you more than the value you would bring to the company. Yeah you wouldn't earn as much, but you could gain the experience you need for a better job down the road. 

I'd argue that your having a VERY narrow view of the market and a VERY narrow view of compensation.

People will only put up with stuff for so long without compensation, but monetary compensation isn't the only kind of compensation.

Jobs would never get to a place wheer people are happy not getting paid enough to live because well... people need to live.  If they don't get paid enough to do so, they'll choose to instead die without working or revolt.

Which is why if it ever even began to approach such a reality you'd see an expansion in social services to keep the working class placated. 

As for the "Rich getting richer" effect.  I'll leave that for the other thread.

I have come to the realization that employers have no clue what they're doing when they put out help wanted ads and undertake the hiring process, partly due to greed and partly to ineptitude.

if employers dont have a clue what they are doing, why dont you become one. An employer. It seems you fancy yourself as someone that does know what they are doing, so you should therefore be a much better employer. 

Neither capital nor the desire to do so. And i read a national survey printed in the Sunday paper today that said close to %50 of employers report significant difficulty in filling positions, despite our unemployment rate that's between 8.2 and 20% depending on the metric you use. Clearly there's a disconnect, and i'm blaming them for it.

If you keep this delusion going where people end up thinking they have a chance to strike it rich, they can labor for years in an area for wages that may not be able to pay for anything, but they think they will get rich.  That can happen.  There is not any necessary connect between what one does and the chance of it paying sufficiently to make a living.   Just get things bad, and desperate enough, and have people glorify the super successful and have them believe they can be one, if they go through this, if they are "good enough" and you could get people killing each other in an arena for glory.  People can sink that low, if a society lets it and people don't have any other options to lean on to.  Having an "every man for themselves" culture will help to breed this.  

What you describe is part of the reasons for the desire to increase social services, to prevent a mass uprising.  But, if there is a political will to gut social services, and push this fend for oneself mentality, you can get people dying as a result.  I remember reading in a thread on here, "I would rather die than get a handout".  Multiple that N-fold, and you get a culture of death abounding, with elites on top glorified.  Only thing to counter it is cultural values that cause people to stop and think a minute.

I'd argue it'd only happen for years in one of two situations

A) Significant progress is made towards it.

B) The person who does so is under a big case of denile.

In regards to the situations, I think a few more can be added:

A) Person faces desperation and doesn't see really any other option but to continue on.  In cases of a bad economy, that can happen.

B) Person feels the area they are working in is their calling, and enjoy doing it.  People do have hobbies, and it could actually be a hobby for them.

C) The environment increasing feeds into the delusions by promoting the successful, and keeps telling people anyone can make it, if they keep on