3 ms·
> First, in capitalism, a work's remuneration is supposed to be related in a way to the perceived utility of that work for society in general. This is a miscon
by imgabe 10y ago
> First, in capitalism, a work's remuneration is supposed to be related in a way to the perceived utility of that work for society in general.
This is a misconception, I think. A work's remuneration is related to the utility perceived by the person providing the remuneration. Society in general doesn't pay people. Specific people pay other people. Find something enough people want and give it to them. It's not any more complicated than that.
- ice109 10y agoyou're wrong. if some good is over valued for long enough market dynamics kick in and the price will go down.
- 1_2__3 10y agoThat's the Econ 101 textbook statement, not reality.
- d--b 10y agoThat's why I wrote "supposed". In reality it's a lot more complex than that, but it is usually one argument brought forward to explain why CEOs are being paid more than the workers they manage.
- sharemywin 10y agodid that bought a pizza shop and increased sales 50% and I got a bankruptcy out of it. because the other part of it is at a lower cost. I pretty much felt Adam Smith's hand smacking me in the face with every tweak. open more hours sales go up just enough to cover costs. increase menu items. lower items. lower prices. raise prices. advertise more the advertising company makes more money but only enough to cover food and labor.