[@Dinh AaronMk] You're argument is a problem. If it's inescapable, that some people work for pennies. And yeah it sucks and it's out there. But that has nothing to do with free market capitalism, nor the cause of it and no one here is to blame for it...and again not all work even needs materials from others...

You act like every product from america is from underpaid orphan children and that's not remotely true...So again I feel like you telling me somebody is making shoes for cheap labor, doesn't mean everyone buying them...and again, if they didn't have that cheap labor what's the alternative? :/

Also arguing people wanting to buy cheaper labor is bad, is not particularly useful either because how does that help? This kind of "we stole the native american's land" mentality that going into your economic mindset completely ignores how businesses work. 

To paraphrase since I know you've talked about communism, because it's too late for me to properly continue.

Employees can be replaced. The business would exist with or without the individual laborers. It would not exist without those who created it. Those who take risk and invest time to create that which didn't previously exist have the right to determine how it operates and what is done with its productivity.

The workers are guaranteed their paychecks. The owner isn't. If the owner doesn't pay his workers he won't have workers for very long.  Plus the government will come looking for the owner to make his workers whole.  If the company goes bankrupt the workers lose nothing but their jobs. The owner will lose everything he put into the business and in some circumstances even more. That is the risk one takes to start/own the business. Only reason people do that is the potential reward to risk their own money. Otherwise no one will take the risk.

Cheap fords from only a few years back are $12000. Not exactly half of 50,000. But that's not the point. 

Again, hours worked doesn't mean anything. Money should be paid by value, not effort...To paraphrase a video again "The Mona Lisa took 12 years to finish and it's insured for 800,000,000. If I spend 24 years to paint a woman's face that doesn't mean the thing will be worth double."

Correlation doesn't equal causation. Hours worked going down in what? That's very vague and not seemingly related points. 

Also that Seattle study apparently is very flawed. "The research has significant flaws—most glaringly that its data excludes 40% of the Seattle workforce."

http://fortune.com/2017/06/27/seattle-minimum-wage-study-results-impact-15-dollar-uw/

But this about raising the wage to 15, and I wasn't arguing that price hike was a good thing. So I don't know why you bring it up, I agree that doing that is bad? I guess...

But one city, means nothing in comparison to 50 years of cheaper and cheaper food AND still WAY cheaper than other countries, even with the cutting off hours for minimum wage jobs, which doesn't represent the job market as a whole.

Yes, forcefully raising the price and not doing it gradually will cost jobs...Doesn't really make any point against what I was saying...

As for rent...an overall 0.5% percent increase for rent...not even 1 percent.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2011/11/global-house-prices

Everywhere else is also increasing and is a shit ton more expensive. Just saying...(has literally nothing to do with capitalism.) There's a chart that's useful and goes over rent and everywhere else too.

http://www.cnbc.com/2015/04/12/et-cheaper-for-americans-and-heres-why.html

"Food prices have fallen 1.6% nationwide since July 2015, according to a new USDA report." Over three times that percent, if true. Negligible? Not really...

Though arguments can be made it's not great for the farmers wallets. But I don't think you'd particularly care to make that argument. So I'll leave it at. Yes, the free market makes things cheaper and there's absolutely no reason to "feel responsible" for other parts of the world sucking because of their own decisions.