3 ms·

> At the moment the problem in the US is labor scarcity. Robots haven't replaced these jobs, these jobs just don't get done. Labor scarcity is another word for

> At the moment the problem in the US is labor scarcity. Robots haven't replaced these jobs, these jobs just don't get done. Labor scarcity is another word for "there aren't enough people who want to work for less," and you describe it as if it's a good thing for society as a whole. We have minimum wage for a reason, because with wages low enough to make a neighborhood chai-seller a possibility, it means that the lower limit of a societal standard of living plummets. The fact that you present India, with its extreme income inequality, as an example of a country that provides an ideal lifestyle for you is indicative.

yummyfajitas 11y ago
According to the BI proponents, we have a shortage of jobs. Yet prices are rising and work is simply going undone. That's completely the opposite of what would happen if they were right. If you want to claim that less employment and lower production is a good thing, go ahead. Your facts are also wrong; the US has a GINI of 41 (comparable to the UK or the Congo). In contrast, India has only 33.6 (comparable to France, Canada or Sierra Leone). India has absolute poverty which is a totally different problem.
- brenschluss 11y ago
  > India has absolute poverty which is a totally different problem. Good point, but it doesn't change my argument; your conveniences are made possible by the higher poverty / lower income of service providers. > If you want to claim that less employment and lower production is a good thing, go ahead. Do you believe that lowering standards of living by eliminating minimum wage is a good thing, because it "increases employment and production"? For example: Mumbai's trash and recycling ecosystem is largely driven by a complex economy of ragpickers, sorters, and tiny recycling factories based in informal settlements (Dharavi, etc). Last time I checked (Summer 2014), the ragpickers are paid 5rs per kg, and on average collect about 10kg a day, making that around 50rs, $0.75, or 48% the cost of a Big Mac (or its equivalent, the Maharaja Mac) in India. Would you really agree that someone who works all day to make 50% of a Big Mac be an ideal model of employment and societal economic policy, because they're working and thus raising employment and production? Because that's what you're asking for if you're claiming that we need to stop a "labor shortage" in order to provide more low-cost conveniences.
  - yummyfajitas 11y ago
    I didn't say we should adopt India's economic system. I said that we have a labor scarcity, not a surplus, as demonstrated by all the work people would like to have done - and which other parts of the world demonstrate can be done - but which isn't being done (by humans or robots). Therefore a solution designed for a surplus is counterproductive. If indeed we have a shortage rather than scarcity (note the terms are not synonymous - a shortage is a quantity supplied below market clearing rates), then we should focus on the root causes of that shortage rather than simply ignoring the problem. Minimum wage might be one such cause, though I rather doubt it (market wages tend to be way above min wage). I suspect that if we have an actual shortage it's regulatory constraints [1] and work disincentives [2] that are the real problem. [1] In the US people seem willing to sell cigarettes at convenient locations, much like in India. But we have the unfortunate habit of using violence to prevent this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Eric_Garner https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Eric_Garner [2] For instance, witness NPR's article on massive numbers of people committing disability fraud to avoid work. If we cracked down on disability fraud, some of those folks would have to return to the workforce. http://apps.npr.org/unfit-for-work/ http://apps.npr.org/unfit-for-work/

yummyfajitas 11y ago

According to the BI proponents, we have a shortage of jobs. Yet prices are rising and work is simply going undone. That's completely the opposite of what would happen if they were right. If you want to claim that less employment and lower production is a good thing, go ahead. Your facts are also wrong; the US has a GINI of 41 (comparable to the UK or the Congo). In contrast, India has only 33.6 (comparable to France, Canada or Sierra Leone). India has absolute poverty which is a totally different problem.

brenschluss 11y ago
> India has absolute poverty which is a totally different problem. Good point, but it doesn't change my argument; your conveniences are made possible by the higher poverty / lower income of service providers. > If you want to claim that less employment and lower production is a good thing, go ahead. Do you believe that lowering standards of living by eliminating minimum wage is a good thing, because it "increases employment and production"? For example: Mumbai's trash and recycling ecosystem is largely driven by a complex economy of ragpickers, sorters, and tiny recycling factories based in informal settlements (Dharavi, etc). Last time I checked (Summer 2014), the ragpickers are paid 5rs per kg, and on average collect about 10kg a day, making that around 50rs, $0.75, or 48% the cost of a Big Mac (or its equivalent, the Maharaja Mac) in India. Would you really agree that someone who works all day to make 50% of a Big Mac be an ideal model of employment and societal economic policy, because they're working and thus raising employment and production? Because that's what you're asking for if you're claiming that we need to stop a "labor shortage" in order to provide more low-cost conveniences.
- yummyfajitas 11y ago
  I didn't say we should adopt India's economic system. I said that we have a labor scarcity, not a surplus, as demonstrated by all the work people would like to have done - and which other parts of the world demonstrate can be done - but which isn't being done (by humans or robots). Therefore a solution designed for a surplus is counterproductive. If indeed we have a shortage rather than scarcity (note the terms are not synonymous - a shortage is a quantity supplied below market clearing rates), then we should focus on the root causes of that shortage rather than simply ignoring the problem. Minimum wage might be one such cause, though I rather doubt it (market wages tend to be way above min wage). I suspect that if we have an actual shortage it's regulatory constraints [1] and work disincentives [2] that are the real problem. [1] In the US people seem willing to sell cigarettes at convenient locations, much like in India. But we have the unfortunate habit of using violence to prevent this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Eric_Garner https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Eric_Garner [2] For instance, witness NPR's article on massive numbers of people committing disability fraud to avoid work. If we cracked down on disability fraud, some of those folks would have to return to the workforce. http://apps.npr.org/unfit-for-work/ http://apps.npr.org/unfit-for-work/