In a free market, labor, like everything else, is subject to the law of supply and demand. Wages are subject to the same law. If there are a low number of workers, then wages will be higher.
Unfortunately, we are not in a free market. The crony corporations and the liberals seeking to create serfs have been bringing in millions of illegal aliens and legal aliens to flood the market with workers.
That has driven wages down, since there's an oversupply of workers.
So, that law of supply and demand says that wages probably aren't what they should be. Most reports I've seen have shown that wages are not keeping up.
I'm not saying "companies should pay more". I'm saying we have a distorted market. The real question is how to get the market back in balance.Get the market back in balance and the wage issue will straighten itself out.
Enforce existing immigration laws. Go after employers who hire illegals. Refuse to pass any immigration bill that even hints at letting more workers into this country. Reduce LEGAL immigration to zero until the U6 employment rate is at about 8%. Build the fence. Strongly support homemaker moms and breadwinner dads as the best family option. (Reduces female employment and increases education of children.)
Wages will then recover.
That’s only part of it...and it is a part of it...but the other side is making investment in people worthwhile - increasing legitimate demand for workers. Instead, we have been making investments of many sorts not worth the risk both from the taxation side, from the regulation side, and from the mandated costs side. In this environment, it makes more sense to hoard money.
As a result, people get kicked down towards the bottom of the ladder, at which point, a minimum wage kicks a portion of the people right off the ladder. Being down the ladder is painful. Being off the ladder means you are likely not developing even basic job skills, and are likely to stay off the ladder.
Workers do not compete with employers. Workers compete with other present and prospective workers. While immigration is something of an issue, the fact that improving by $1,000 the lot of someone who would otherwise be a welfare recipient will cost a company a lot more than $1,000 is a much bigger factor.
One idea you mention, however, I hadn't seen expressed in such terms. I wonder what the effect would be if the EITC were modified to particularly reward married breadwinners?