3 ms·
Your statement only makes sense in a context where both the buyer and seller have roughly equal power. As it is, that has almost never been true when talking ab
by s73v3r 11y ago
Your statement only makes sense in a context where both the buyer and seller have roughly equal power. As it is, that has almost never been true when talking about labor. An employer who doesn't have enough employees is still going to be able to compete and make money, just not as much. However, an employee who doesn't get enough work is going to be homeless or starve.
- zo1 11y ago"However, an employee who doesn't get enough work is going to be homeless or starve." Don't mean to be sarcastic here, but isn't that the whole point of government right now? Foodstamps, welfare payments, child-assistance money, social security, free medical care, etc. At what point can we stop using this supposed "power-differential" between employer and employee as some sort of silent force in the labour market?
- s73v3r 11y agoProbably when people stop talking about a "supposed" power-differential, realize it exists, and do something about it. And while you're not wrong that a lot of that safety net stuff is the point of government, you'd have a pretty hard time claiming that they were doing it well, or helping everyone who needed it, especially with a lot of states slashing aid from their budgets in order to give tax cuts.