for me it's all of the above. A developer who allows me to introduce products in less time than other developers is valuable to me.

A salesperson who brings in good numbers is compensated well for their success. Those successful salsepeople then allow me to hire good developers so we can create better products thus making it easier to sell and the cycle continues.

But, that all began with a dream (mine) and risking EVERYTHING and getting the product and market right. If I was wrong, then there would be no salespeople as I was the initial salesperson. There would be no development "team" as I could not initially afford them.

I hold all accountable and don't measure by hours worked. If I make a mistake and hire a person with a poor work ethic, I quickly release them. I owe it to myself, to my shareholders and employees (who also have options) and to my customers.

I can't have price increases to compensate for lazy employees (this isn't the govt). I can't have lost revenue due to lazy employees which then affects the performers.

I'm not in a sector where I have min wage employees but a fair argument is that if min wage increases by 40%, should I increase wages by 40% of all of my employees? How do I tell them that they are now only worth 3x min wage as opposed to 4x or more? If I compensate for the min wage increase and give a proportionate increase across the board, how do I determine which employee(s) I lay off in order to free up the cash flow to hand out the pay raises?

You see, a magic pot of money does not come my way the first day/week/month/quarter/year after a wage increase. I have a finite cash flow and must manage it.

I am positive 100% that retail stores and other min wage type employers have the same concern that a pot of money does not arrive the day/week/month/quarter that min wage increases and that they would need to compensate for the cash flow impact.