I don't expect to convince you (I write this stuff to help me think thru selective issues that grab me).
The short answer to your objection is that the wage elasticities are not nearly as large as you suppose.
In other words, the answer that will convince you requires you to already possess a deep understanding of microeconomic analysis. It's hopelessly counter-intuitive to anyone who doesn't possess this.
That is why 85% of economists think trade protectionism is almost always bad, 75% think minimum wage laws are mostly harmful, 70% think restrictive union practices hurt workers wages and economic efficiency overall, etc....But 75% of economists never debate these with non-economists because the reasoning they must employ cannot be understood by laymen.
But you can hit on some of these issues by looking at it hypothetically.
Ask yourself, and try to reason thru, that if Walmart makes big profits and expands greatly by paying employees less--why hasn't some Kmart or Target come in and sell for same low prices, but pay workers more? Walmart would then have to raise wages to keep all it's employees from leaving, or go bankrupt.
Ask yourself if Walmart can raise prices to make more profits to fund higher wagers--doesn't this imply they aren't smart enough to maximize profits right now? Such a buffonishly inept business could be easily outcompeted by even dumb businessmen.
Ask yourself what kind of economy or society will function in any proper manner if employers must be charitable institutions?
