More money in the pockets of entry-level workers sounds great, but Rachel Greszler of the conservative Heritage Foundation argues that such workers, and the economy writ large, are hurt more than helped by increases in the minimum wage.
Read the rest of my post. Learn what the word “intended” means. Understand how “intended” doesn’t mean successfully implemented. Understand that by stating “it wasn’t intended” is false.
Is english your first language? I can simplify it for you if the language is a challenge
Only a fool determines intent based solely on what someone says, espically a politician. Blindly believing that FDR intended minimum wage to be a living wage because he said so but somehow couldn't get a living wage passed is impressively naive. The National Industrial Recovery Act passed the House 329-80 & senate 60-26, he had the votes for 0.35 per hour but didn't do it.
I am trying to understand your position - this is my summary/interpretation which could still be wildly off base. Apologies if that is the case.
“FDR may have said he intended minimum wage to be a living wage, but that was only a speech meant for the people, so they think he will help. He was lying and never actually intended the minimum wage to be a living wage at all. Instead FDR wanted a minimum wage far lower than a living, thriving wage despite what he said”