I would argue that every job designed to be ones full time job while they are at a life phase where they have to be roughly self sufficient should have a wage that enables them to do so. Or, they need to go do something else.
This is not every job. It is the situation for many in the gig economy.
The reason people don't go do something else more often is something I would love to see studied.
Why shouldn't every job supply a living wage? You realize what your proposing is a net societal negative, right?
If a person has X amount in their savings and their job is not a living wage, then by definition they are likely going to have to rely on their savings to make up the wage differences. This is kind of a bad thing for capitalistic-based societies because you need people to consume, and if you have a large amount of people unable to consume then that negatively impacts the free market.
It's also bad because it places stress on other parts of society. No healthcare means when you eventually get sick or injured the hospital has to take on those costs, which means people pay more while destroying the lives of said injured or sick person.
People will have to make up the wage differential somehow, which also means that underclass of workers is more easily exploitable and/or pushed into illegal behaviors in order to survive.
