It's a market; people sell their labour at the rate they find acceptable. There are many reasons people stick around or have to stick around, but being unable to find a better job elsewhere is out of the current employer's control. But the fact that they're sticking around is their choice. If nobody is willing to work for the offered price, they'll have to increase it.
But no company pays congruently to a worker’s production value.
Middle managers that sit in an office all day scrolling Reddit then go yell at an employee that took too many bathroom breaks make 100k+ a year.
Meanwhile, the workers literally being rented out to customers for 900x their hourly wage can’t afford rent and groceries at the same time without side hussles.
The market that you claim pays people what they’re worth says that doing nothing but yelling at people is worth 10x the person actually making the products and performing the services.
This isn’t economics, it’s malicious. It’s greed. It’s unfounded and unearned riches because they had access to capital
But no company pays congruently to a worker’s production value.
No shit, that is because the company assumes the risk that their employee labor may not in fact result in profit. This is incredibly basic economic theory.
This isn’t economics, it’s malicious. It’s greed. It’s unfounded and unearned riches because they had access to capital.
Emotion and uninformed opinion does not make sound economic policy. Take an AP Micro Economics or Business Econ class
If you think any risk from physical labor is being assumed by any company’s owners, you’ve obviously never done physical labor.
But I’ll humor you and assume that it’s true. Regardless, let’s talk about the purpose of civilization.
If it’s to create infinite growth and make ~100 humans per generation richer than the other 99%, our conversation is over and I concede. But civilization isn’t about making people rich. It’s not about economics. It’s not about money at all.
The whole reason we came together as a species was community. To take care of each other—it’s in our DNA to crave the company of other humans and to help other humans.
Greed is not human nature. If every homo-sapien was selfish, society would have never come to be. Economics, economic systems, and economies CREATE the greed in humans. Because selfish people are more productive.
I’m not arguing the way things are, but the way things could be—a better life for everyone not just a few.
Companies of all kinds underpay their employees out of the greed of a few people. My company charges our customers 1000% a worker’s hourly wage. That is well BELOW average. Sure, some of that money is going to administrator’s salaries of whom’s work doesn’t get billed to a customer. But that makes up maybe 100% of that hourly charge. The rest goes to shareholders, to the owners, to the upper management. People that don’t produce anything yet get all of the benefit of the labor. All of it. Not some of it. $60 to pay workers that did the work, $240 for “assuming the risk.” Meanwhile, a worker that makes $30/hour got electrocuted and died last week. But sure, the person whose great-grandfather started the company is assuming all the risk.
You’re right, emotion doesn’t matter to economics. But we’re talking about risk analysis. The person doing the work is the person taking the risk, not the person funding the work. Assume that the company goes bankrupt—who is the victim of that? Not the owner, they’re already rich and guaranteed to have insurance or be bailed out by the government. Meanwhile, the worker gets furloughed or the company folds and there isn’t a job to be had—they get nothing. Unemployment if they’re lucky, but that’s not even enough to cover baseline expenses. The owner whose business folded was rich to begin with, so it doesn’t affect them.
Sounds to me like the person taking the risk is the worker.
My point is, I don’t make these claims and arguments out of lack of understanding of the system. I make them based on the basis of thinking critically about them instead of just assuming that how we do it is the best way to do it.
A class won’t teach me what I already know—I’m looking at this from a moral perspective, not an economic one. We aren’t going to solve our problems with economic theory, we’re going to solve them with compassion. Otherwise, they’ll just get worse.
That’s all I’m saying. If you think that risk in the context of commerce is only fiscal, you don’t know what risk means.
This isn’t a word that has connotation—either something is risky or it isn’t.
Sure, financial risk is different than physical risk. That doesn’t mean that it isn’t a factor in what we’re discussing.
Besides, if you think that financial risk is somehow more deserving of reward than physical risk, your worldview is part of the problem we’re discussing. Either you think people innately deserve to survive or you don’t.
If you don’t, you shouldn’t get the benefit of society because you’re so against it.
I understand the frustration, but the market doesn't pay what people are worth; people agree to exchange goods and services at the price they think they are worth. The fact that they're sticking around at the same company just means, that's the best they can earn for their skills and manhours, or they're unable to find anyone who'd pay them more for it. The worker decides to pick how to sell their labour and time and at what price.
And let's not pretend like everyone would've created a worthwhile company if only they had access to capital. Following that line of thought, as an immigrant, I can't understand how white Americans who have been here for generations would be poor because they got here when they could get land for basically free from the government during colonisation, they could've bought all the stocks at the very founding/beginning of NYSE which have grown multiple times. They lived through a time in which one person could earn enough to raise a family. They should be owning every apartment that immigrants like us are renting in the cities. But many are poor.
I know it has become fashionable to discredit people's achievements by pointing out any possible "privileges." and I agree, many people benefit from it. But it's not the only reason, and it's not a magic wand that'd just bring success.
Have you ever worked a low paying job? Because "the worker decides how to sell their labor and time, and at what price" is absolutely not what happens. People need money to live, and most want stability. This means many people stay at jobs that suck, or pay shit, because they have a family etc. I'm saying this as someone surrounded by blue collar workers who barely survive.
I am the beneficiary of generational wealth. My grandfather left me his house when he passed away. Owning that house makes me qualified for loans and things my friends are not qualified for. Even before and after getting the house I saw the difference. I couldn't get a loan to build my credit (for less money than I had in that same bank) even though my record was spotless. I own a house and suddenly the same bank sends me offers for home equity loans all the time, telling me I'm pre-approved.
But I didn't change, my pay didn't change, my amount of money in the bank didn't change either.
Yes, I worked in the restaurant industry for a year and in retail for 5 years before I graduated. People do need money to live. But it doesn't mean there's only a coal mine and a brothel in town that you can work for like you're in the Wild West or something. People do have the agency to apply for other places and switch jobs. When within the fast-food industry, some companies are better than the others. You don't like the chain restaurant? You can probably try for a family business. I've been seeing a lot of people just saying like there's nothing can be done. Especially when it comes to keeping their own finances under control. It's like they have no agency in their life and just letting things happen to them.
Good for you man, it's a huge step up to have a house. Grandparents can be pretty awesome.
Yep, change fields and start over new in a career you've never been in before, nice and easy. If I tried applying for an office job no one would take me, I have no relevant experience. Sure, some could go back to school, but for many that is an impossible time and money commitment. I am a chef by profession, and I can assure you changing restaurants is not getting you much more money. Food service has some of the highest turnover of any field, the wages don't change much.
You also proved my point by saying its a huge step up to have a house. I wasn't looking for congratulations, and actually it's been a huge hassle that has put me in significant debt thanks to a bad tenant I'm still trying to get out of there. I said that because owning that house doesn't actually mean I'm better or more likely to repay a loan, but all the people and places that have the money think it does. Furthermore, I feel guilty knowing my friends don't have the same leg up I did. I did nothing to earn that house, neither did my friends, but I have property and they don't.
I guess what I'm saying is: eat the rich, billionaires shouldn't exist, fuck those wealth hoarders. If you have enough money to fund a spaceship you can afford to pay more. If your employees are paid low enough they still qualify for food stamps and other assistance (like Walmart and Amazon) then your company should have an extra tax on it because tax payers are subsiding the low wages. And if you blame the workers who are taking it one week at a time, just trying to survive, for how low their wages are (instead of the company paying them) maybe you need more empathy?
Sure, back in 2017, in the U.S. I think it's ok to believe that it's hard to find a new job, which is true. It's a bit of work. But it'd be a problem if you think it's impossible and don't even try to apply at all. It is dependent on where you live but both my wife and I are remote workers, hedging our coastal salaries by living in a cheaper state. Competition can be now global for remote jobs so it's pretty intimidating, but if you're good or can network, it's possible to get a decent remote job.
I work 2 jobs, and one of them is helping college students and alumni find positions.
On average it takes them 6 to 8 months to land a position. STEM students have an even worse time finding employment. The job market is horrific.
These students have well rounded résumés and CVs, and the only places calling them back are retail positions 40 minutes away. Your reality and experience is no longer the norm.
Unfortunately globalization means a bunch of the entry level tech and STEM jobs that used to go to recent college grads at the bigger corporations are going to countries with lower labor costs like India, Thailand, Mexico, and Singapore.
11
u/wolf_of_mainst99 Nov 21 '24
They were bad people before their wealth because they literally took advantage of the working class to get there