aligning minimum wage with other nations - You have to be careful with minimum wages. If you set them too high, it hurts the people you were trying to help. For example, if we set a minimum wage in the US of $100/hr, we'd kill a lot of jobs. For some countries, a $15 or $17 minimum wage would kill their economy. Their workers couldn't compete and they'd be left with no jobs at all. Even here in the US, there is a danger that a $15 minimum wage would be too high for Puerto Rico, where it would be higher than the median wage. I think it is better to set minimum wages at the level appropriate for the area - high enough to prevent exploitation but not so high that it causes large job losses.

I get a share of company profits where I work indirectly in the form of performance bonuses and stock grants. The higher you are in the company the more that they tie your compensation to the companies profits. The problem with doing this too much too far down the income scale is that lower income people could be hurt by too much variability in their income. If you are living paycheck to paycheck, losing a big chunk of pay because your company didn't make its targets would not be a good thing.

I think the ratio problem is one of company provided benefits. If we provided good benefits nationally, this wouldn't be nearly as much of an issue. If you limit the ratio, that might negatively effect people who prefer to work part time or companies where it makes sense to have most people work part time. I'm not sure how big a deal either of those is, but I think the focus should be on getting good benefits for everyone not just full time workers.

...I'm not thinking that a world wide minimum wage is a good idea. I'm saying that the cost of living in Australia, for example, is probably not over double what it is here. I think minimum wage needs some alignment for regular cost of living changes. The current federal minimum wage hasn't changed from $7.25/hour in going on 10 years. It's time for an adjustment and it's time to recognize that regular adjustments need to be made.

Stock grants would equate to a share in profits, performance bonuses not really. A bonus tied to your personal performance isn't necessarily linked to overall company profits. I very much dislike the attitude of both employees and, particularly, companies where the employee-employer relationship is considered disposable.

You're right about leveling some benefits (health coverage) nationally. I'm on board with national free medical care. If your business has only a few employees (like a BnB or a corner store) then fine use part timers. I have a small family owned market 2 blocks away that hire kids (high school/college) for afternoons. They're open 8-6 most days. If you're Walmart, 20 full timers and 110 part time folks doesn't cut it.

Lots of states have their own minimum higher than the national. My state (NJ) just raised it. OTOH, my property tax bill is so high you could climb to the top and look down on the moon.