And I'm not sure why companies "owe" their employees a "living wage" or "affordable healthcare"
I throw those entitlements in quotes because there is so much that goes into them & what defines them, that it seems silly to throw those terms around so arbitrarily.
Plus there is a cause and effect relationship between the price of different types of labor that seems to elude you BG. You want a grocery store clerk to be guaranteed $50K a year (just for shits and giggles; for one person living alone or with a kid I'm not even sure that could qualify as living wage), then be prepared for $10 milk, $7 loaves of bread, $10/lb chicken breasts etc... directly impacting the bottom line of the very people you're looking to protect. And don't even bring up gov't subsidy; that merely amounts to the same thing. Letting the market naturally dictate the prices of goods and labor to a large degree balances things out more equitably than any person (as EVERYONE has a vested interest) could.
And on the healthcare side, there are all the issues of copay, deductibles and of course the health of the insured. Two people could have the same plan and one person could never spend a dime on healthcare, while the other person could be spending thousands every year, despite being insured. Short of signing into law that companies provide employees with prohibitively expensive "free" healthcare, there's no way for companies to provide healthcare that is universally affordable, without providing insurance that would put them out of business.
I think its good that people look out for the common man, but solutions have to be analyzed within the context of how the world works. Demanding "living wages" and "affordable healthcare" without showing an explanation or understanding of what these things mean both in the context of the employee AND the employer seems dubious; after all, without a profitable business structure there is NO employee or employer.