So your "point" is that salaries should be completely independent of a worker's skill level?
Look, I get that you and most progressives want "liveable" wages for workers. No shame in that. However it would be nice if you would acknowledge the disadvantages to enacting a policy to enforce such a living wage. Such as that employment for those getting "living wages" will go down in a simple supply/demand reaction to the increased costs of staffing. Businesses might exit entire lines of business as unprofitable. A non-zero amount of workers with low skills will be completely unemployable since the value produced by their labor can't recoup the costs of their compensation. Et cetera.
I know you and fellow progressives tend to think of business owners as rich plutocrats swimming in vaults of gold like Scrooge McDuck. And think "of course they could pay their workers more, the CEO can just buy one less yacht." However that's not typically the case - just like you businesses have plenty of costs to pay and make plans based on expected revenues and income. Just like you they probably could "afford" to hire more workers and/or pay them more, but it typically means something else gets sacrificed. For example, if I forced your household to employ a cleaning service and pay them $15/hour you could probably afford it. But it also means you'd have to give up other spending to do so - for example, you might have wanted to send your kid to a summer camp or two and no longer can. Or pay for math tutoring to bring her grades up from 'meh' to As. Those objectives are just as valid and just as valuable as hiring the cleaning service and paying them "living wage." Expand that $15/hour principle to every service you consume, from daycare to dry cleaning and soon you'd be out of money to pay people. You'd wind up deciding "I guess I really don't need dry cleaning so I'll iron my clothes myself since I can't do without daycare." Businesses are the same way. They might want to spend more on customer service, or R&D, or any number of things but if you made all their staff artificially expensive because you wanted them to have "living wages" then the business may cut back on everything but core operations and those people don't get hired or get let go. Just like your dry cleaner would.
tl;dr businesses aren't all run by guys like this and raising costs of workers via "liveable wage" laws means less workers, there is no free lunch.