The myth is clean, simple, and wrong. “Minimum wage jobs are for teenagers.” It is repeated so often it has hardened into common sense. But it is not sense. It is a lie. A lie with a function. A lie that does work.
Let us start with the history, because the lie starts there. The federal minimum wage was created by the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. The country was in the throes of the Great Depression. The purpose of the law was not to give teenagers spending money. It was to stop the rampant exploitation of adult workers. Franklin Roosevelt was clear: its goal was “a fair day’s pay for a fair day’s work” and “a minimum standard of living necessary for health, efficiency, and general well-being.” It was about breadwinners. It was about survival. To retroactively claim this law was designed for teenage pocket money is not a revision. It is a erasure. It severs the policy from its true purpose protecting vulnerable adults so that its current failure can be framed as a misunderstanding.
Now, the present. Who actually works for the federal minimum wage? The image is of a pimpled kid after school. The reality is overwhelmingly different. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the vast majority of minimum wage workers are adults. Two thirds are over the age of twenty. Nearly half are over thirty. They are the home health aide, the fast-food worker, the retail clerk, the childcare provider. They are disproportionately women. They are disproportionately people of color. Many are the primary earners for their families. The “teenager” in the myth is a figment. A ghost. A convenient fiction used to explain away the reality of adults being paid poverty wages.
This is where the myth reveals its brutal, circular logic. It looks at these adults doing vital work and says: Your labor is only worth a teenager’s wage. It acknowledges the person is an adult but categorizes their economic value as adolescent. It is a bait and switch. First, it says the jobs are for teens. Then, when faced with adults in those jobs, it says the adults are therefore like teens. It moralizes poverty. You are not underpaid because the wage is too low. You are underpaid because you, the adult, have failed to “graduate” to real work. Your poverty is not an economic condition. It is a sign of personal stunted growth. The myth pathologizes the worker to excuse the wage.
But the cruelty is dual. The myth is also a horror story for actual teenagers. It posits a teenage life of pure frivolity. It assumes every teen lives in a stable home where their income is for luxuries, not necessities. It has no room for the teenager who works to help pay the rent because their parent is disabled. For the teen who buys groceries. For the teen saving every dollar to escape a dangerous home or to fund the education their family cannot afford. The myth declares, by fiat, that a teenager does not need to live. Their wage is for fun. Their financial reality is irrelevant. The moment a teenager’s labor is needed for survival, the myth abandons them. It tells them their need is illegitimate.
This creates the catch-22, the perfect knot of exploitation.
If you are an adult working a minimum wage job, the myth says you are a societal failure, an overgrown child who deserves your need.
If you are a teenager working a minimum wage job, the myth says your needs are not real, your labor is trivial, and you have no right to a wage that could sustain a life.
See how it works? The myth is not a description of reality. It is a tool. Its function is to justify paying any human being, regardless of age or circumstance, a wage that cannot sustain life. It defines a living wage as a privilege of adulthood, and then defines adulthood itself as a privilege reserved for those who do not need a minimum wage.
It is a closed loop of moral excuse making. It uses a fictional past to condemn adults in the present, and a fictional present to abandon teenagers in need. It turns the minimum wage from a baseline for human dignity into a pedagogy for the young, and a punishment for the old.
The truth is simple, and it grinds the myth to dust. The minimum wage was always about life, not lesson learning. It is about the price of bread and rent and light and heat. It is about the value of an hour of human life spent in labor. That value does not magically change based on the birthday of the person doing the work. A burger flipped by a eighteen-year-old is not inherently worth less than a burger flipped by a thirty-six-year-old. The work is the work. The life it supports is a life.
The myth “minimum wage jobs are for teenagers” is not an economic observation. It is a propaganda line. It is the rhetorical grease that keeps the engine of poverty running. It lets society look at a working adult in need and see a failed child. It lets society look at a working child in need and see a playful ghost.
Stop seeing the ghost. See the person. The person is real. Their work is real. Their need is real. And the lie that says otherwise is the oldest one in the book: the lie that some people do not deserve to live.
Follow the Vanguard on Social Media – X, Instagram and Facebook. Subscribe the Vanguard News letters. To make a tax-deductible donation, please visit davisvanguard.org/donate or give directly through ActBlue. Your support will ensure that the vital work of the Vanguard continues.
This is where the myth reveals its brutal, circular logic. It looks at these adults doing vital work and says: Your labor is only worth a teenager’s wage. It acknowledges the person is an adult but categorizes their economic value as adolescent. It is a bait and switch. First, it says the jobs are for teens. Then, when faced with adults in those jobs, it says the adults are therefore like teens.
There is no such message or circular logic. Employers don’t hire people in order to send societal messages. They hire people based on the value that they perceive that employees provide in particular positions and offer salaries commensurate with whatever the market allows.
The market determines the value of work, and minimum wage is actually interference in the market. Sort of like price controls (including rent control).
No you clearly missed the point Matt was making and it’s a point you often make – we treat minimum wage jobs as though they are for teens. The problem is that for many people it’s the job they can get and it’s not something they can live on.
Well, it’s an interesting history that he provided, but it does appear that things have changed.
Truth be told, many adults aren’t as capable as teenagers are. I’m not as capable as I once was in regard to many types of jobs.
The other thing that has changed is an expectation that young adults will either go to college (and hopefully pick a lucrative field to pay off their student loan debt), or go into a skilled trade. (Actually, there was probably a much higher degree of skilled tradesmen back in the day – building houses, fixing things, etc.). Nowadays, folks like you want to eliminate them further (with factory houses, etc.) :-)
“They torture and scare you for 20-odd years. Then they expect you to pick a career.”
“And you think you’re so classless and free. But you’re still f*kng peasants as far as I can see”.
(John Lennon – Working Class Hero. A very “upbeat” and “positive” message in that one.)
Oh well, we still have social security and our 401Ks. (Right??)
Just noticed that there’s an article in the Enterprise (and CalMatters) regarding the minimum wage. Apparently, there’s a study which largely supports industry claims regarding the impacts.
Sort of a double-whammy: Higher prices that disproportionately impact low-income consumers, AND fewer jobs as workers are replaced with automation. (Which almost seems rather amusing, given the intent of the legislation to increase the minimum wage for workers at California’s restaurants.)
https://calmatters.org/commentary/dan-walters/2026/03/fast-food-wage-california-effects/
Though honestly, my opinion is that jobs should never be preserved for the sole purpose of creating employment. (Which is also why factory housing might be a good idea – if it wasn’t so ugly.)
“A burger flipped by a eighteen-year-old is not inherently worth less than a burger flipped by a thirty-six-year-old.”
And a burger flipped by an automatic burger flipper is probably cheaper to make than a burger made by either.
I experienced numerous small businesses that cut their hours and their staff each Jan. 1 as California raised its minimum wage each year. I talked to their managers as I used to own a business with staff and they all blamed the minimum wage. We all know how much of a burden wages are on a small business. Starbucks can absorb the hit, at least for awhile, so what you get for your minwage is more corporations, or in the case of Davis, a mall full of chains.
A staffer is worth exactly what a business is willing to pay them, no more, no less. Anything else distorts the market, which can happen, but there will be consequences.
There’s a great current article on this by Dan Walters in the Enterprise.