Really? Then if you're fiscally conservative you must be in favor of reining in things like medicaid, and letting wages respond to the market rather than to a "minimum wage." But if you're a social liberal -- at least in the modern meaning of that word -- then you're glad to see medicaid expand and encompass more people, and you're in favor of a government-imposed "living wage" (whatever that is). Your statement is an oxymoron.
Firstly, I'm not an American, and secondly that's a very narrow view of both perspectives. Of course there are times when the two sides come into conflict, that happens even for someone who is right or left of centre. The key is that you take "socially liberal" as "a social liberal", but you miss the bit where I say not very far on either side for the most part.
I look at universal healthcare in Australia and see that we spend much less on health than the US does (public and private) for better outcomes. I see that the US system is broken, with very poor fiscal outcomes. It doesn't need to move to a universal healthcare system, but it does need to look at tort reform and health insurance and fix both, which are utterly broken. The level of public healthcare probably can be expanded in some cases, but it's likely that overall costs would go down if less people needed it as a result of fixing those two aspects I mentioned. Fiscally conservative, socially liberal - in a balance, with room to move around depending on needs (i.e. no extremism).
Wages? That delves into far more complex economics than a simple yes or no to your question. In essence, though, a reasonable and sustainable baseline to protect individuals who have essentially no power compared to their employers balanced against the need to reflect the actual value of the work. The real issue is consumers expecting to get a lot for nothing, and I have to say the tip system which in theory pays those who do better but in reality often screws over people because the consumers don't always play the game fairly. The expectation that tips are your basic income is fundamentally flawed because regardless of your performance, someone can stiff you on the tip.
So, complex, but very much capable of being looked at from both perspectives to achieve a reasonable balance.
More interesting would be to find a topic where it was more of a dilemma, and that's where I feel comfortable not being an extreme centrist, knowing that sometimes there's no balance possible and you just need to pick a way forward, and that can be discussed.
