Yep, half a loaf is better than no bread.

Those on low wages always have the option to seek higher paid alternative employment.

In the meantime bide your time and cut your coat according to your cloth.

I'd rather have a little money than none at all. It's a matter of eating and providing for my family even just a little versus not providing for them period.

I have had about 30 jobs in 6 different industries (and for city, state, and federal government agencies) all across the country.

There are two things I have observed to be consistent from sea to shining sea:

- 1 - Almost everybody thinks their bosses are overpaid.

- 2 - Almost everybody, including the bosses, thinks they themselves are underpaid.

If you don't want to be "underpaid", then your only other choice is to be not paid at all.

That is why you need to negotiate for your wage/salary, and be a valuable enough worker (and hard to replace) that you have an advantage in the negotiations.

At least that way you will be at a higher level of "underpaid".

I agree with you, especially from your line: "I hate that argument...".

I was underpaid for years. For 40 of those years I lived in an underpaid state (Maine). I was sitting in a construction trailer in Wisconsin doing paperwork one day when I heard the fax power up. Thinking it might be for me, I checked it out. It was the next years pay scale for those that I was in charge of, along with a few $million in equipment. I made a copy and took it back to my boss when I finally returned. He read it and said "I agree, this is ridiculous. Let me take this." Two weeks later my salary (and the salary of maybe 30 others in the department was doubled. Thank you union people in WI! Being paid IS necessary, being paid fairly is important.

Something is better than nothing. But it varies with the situation. If the "not paid at all" scenario is happening because a bunch of working stiffs are standing up to an abusive and exploitive employer then maybe the no pay scenario can bring a change.

Thanks for all the responses. Good points.

In dire circumstances, I would definitely accept getting something (even if underpaid) than nothing. But if one has other options available to them, then I would not settle for being underpaid, at least until you have explored the other options that may get you more of what you are worth. I've often heard the saying, "you get what you are worth". If you believe you are only worth $10 bucks an hour, then that is your worth. If you believe you are worth more than that, with persistence and perseverance, your worth will definitely be more (no guarantees how high, but definitely more than what you are currently getting underpaid for).

I'd rather be underpaid. It's better to have a terrible source of income than have no income whatsoever. But what is the definition of 'underpaid' here? Is it like your opinion of being underpaid or because you're working 60+ hours a week for like 9.78 an hour?