6 ms·

The same reason that landlords are entitled to expensive rent, doctors to high salaries, and colleges to high tuition. Its the market rate for those things. I w

by Veelox 8y ago

The same reason that landlords are entitled to expensive rent, doctors to high salaries, and colleges to high tuition. Its the market rate for those things. I would say there are much better second order effects from focusing on bringing prices down than the second order effects of focusing on forcing employers to pay more.

s73v3r_ 8y ago
"Its the market rate for those things. " I don't think you can say that when they're the ones who set those rates. Especially when they constantly complain about not being able to find qualified workers. "I would say there are much better second order effects from focusing on bringing prices down than the second order effects of focusing on forcing employers to pay more." Maybe, maybe not. But that's not an argument for not increasing wages.
- Veelox 8y ago
  When you hear someone say "I cannot find qualified workers" always add "at the price I am offering" because if they doubled or tripled the wage they offered, they could find a qualified person so it is a matter of price, not a matter of availability. >Maybe, maybe not. But that's not an argument for not increasing wages. The initial comment was about paying a living wage. There are two ways to make a non-living wage a living wage. Make the wage higher or make the living cheaper. I think way to much political energy is focused on making wages higher when I think it would be more productive in the long run to focus on making living cheaper.
  - vonmoltke 8y ago
    > When you hear someone say "I cannot find qualified workers" always add "at the price I am offering" because if they doubled or tripled the wage they offered, they could find a qualified person so it is a matter of price, not a matter of availability. Somewhat related, but sometimes the issue is an unreasonable definition of "qualified". I feel like there are a lot of choosing beggars, particularly in the tech industry.
    - mmt 8y ago
      Isn't the aphorism "beggars can't be choosers" exactly about price, though? (Just the price happens to be zero) That said, I don't actually mean to merely quibble over semantics and wish to clarify: Is what you meant that many tech tech companies are hoping to hire someone that just doesn't exist at all [1], rather than not existing in sufficient number? [1] Expecting, like Dilbert's pointy-haired boss that, just because qualifications can be listed in a job description, there must exist someone who fits them all.
    - user5994461 8y ago
      >>> I feel like there are a lot of choosing beggars, particularly in the tech industry. Assuming true, that would be limited to the silicon valley and new york area. Try to work in tech in smaller cities and you will quickly realize that there are few employers and they can be picky.
49531 8y ago
I don't think the market explains most of those things. College tuition isn't because there is a short supply of educators and high supply of people wanting to be educated. There's not much scarce about it. I would argue that tuition increases because we've streamlined student loans and marketed college as a tool of mobility. Doctor pay is also highly abstracted from something like "market forces". Rent prices are probably the closest thing to a commodity determined by market. Also, forcing employers to pay more is actually a supply/demand conundrum. If you want to buy unskilled labor for $8/hr but the going rate is $15/hr you're not going to have much luck.
- Veelox 8y ago
  I feel like we are strong agreeing. If we change the how student loans worked we could reduce the rate of increase. If we changed out medicine worked we could bring down prices (currently there are way to many links in the chain all making a buck). Also, if we allowed more housing to be built, prices would go down. >Also, forcing employers to pay more is actually a supply/demand conundrum. If you want to buy unskilled labor for $8/hr but the going rate is $15/hr you're not going to have much luck. The issue I have is most people who want a living wage, want to be done by setting the minimum wage so that a 40 hr week job gets you their. The causes lots of problems because it eliminates everyone from the labor market that cannot produce that much value. So in the end, you negatively impact the young, the old, the disabled, those who want to work part time, even ex-cons by setting minimum wage at a living wage value.
  - s73v3r_ 8y ago
    I cannot disagree more. It's a "minimum wage". What good is it if it's not a living wage? What's the point of having a minimum wage that one cannot survive on?
    - plasticchris 8y ago
      Because not everyone needs to survive on it. As pointed out above students and the elderly can easily be priced out of the labor market if the minimum wage is pegged to this standard.

by Veelox 8y ago

s73v3r_ 8y ago

"Its the market rate for those things. " I don't think you can say that when they're the ones who set those rates. Especially when they constantly complain about not being able to find qualified workers. "I would say there are much better second order effects from focusing on bringing prices down than the second order effects of focusing on forcing employers to pay more." Maybe, maybe not. But that's not an argument for not increasing wages.

Veelox 8y ago
When you hear someone say "I cannot find qualified workers" always add "at the price I am offering" because if they doubled or tripled the wage they offered, they could find a qualified person so it is a matter of price, not a matter of availability. >Maybe, maybe not. But that's not an argument for not increasing wages. The initial comment was about paying a living wage. There are two ways to make a non-living wage a living wage. Make the wage higher or make the living cheaper. I think way to much political energy is focused on making wages higher when I think it would be more productive in the long run to focus on making living cheaper.
- vonmoltke 8y ago
  > When you hear someone say "I cannot find qualified workers" always add "at the price I am offering" because if they doubled or tripled the wage they offered, they could find a qualified person so it is a matter of price, not a matter of availability. Somewhat related, but sometimes the issue is an unreasonable definition of "qualified". I feel like there are a lot of choosing beggars, particularly in the tech industry.
  - mmt 8y ago
    Isn't the aphorism "beggars can't be choosers" exactly about price, though? (Just the price happens to be zero) That said, I don't actually mean to merely quibble over semantics and wish to clarify: Is what you meant that many tech tech companies are hoping to hire someone that just doesn't exist at all [1], rather than not existing in sufficient number? [1] Expecting, like Dilbert's pointy-haired boss that, just because qualifications can be listed in a job description, there must exist someone who fits them all.
  - user5994461 8y ago
    >>> I feel like there are a lot of choosing beggars, particularly in the tech industry. Assuming true, that would be limited to the silicon valley and new york area. Try to work in tech in smaller cities and you will quickly realize that there are few employers and they can be picky.

49531 8y ago

I don't think the market explains most of those things. College tuition isn't because there is a short supply of educators and high supply of people wanting to be educated. There's not much scarce about it. I would argue that tuition increases because we've streamlined student loans and marketed college as a tool of mobility. Doctor pay is also highly abstracted from something like "market forces". Rent prices are probably the closest thing to a commodity determined by market. Also, forcing employers to pay more is actually a supply/demand conundrum. If you want to buy unskilled labor for $8/hr but the going rate is $15/hr you're not going to have much luck.

Veelox 8y ago
I feel like we are strong agreeing. If we change the how student loans worked we could reduce the rate of increase. If we changed out medicine worked we could bring down prices (currently there are way to many links in the chain all making a buck). Also, if we allowed more housing to be built, prices would go down. >Also, forcing employers to pay more is actually a supply/demand conundrum. If you want to buy unskilled labor for $8/hr but the going rate is $15/hr you're not going to have much luck. The issue I have is most people who want a living wage, want to be done by setting the minimum wage so that a 40 hr week job gets you their. The causes lots of problems because it eliminates everyone from the labor market that cannot produce that much value. So in the end, you negatively impact the young, the old, the disabled, those who want to work part time, even ex-cons by setting minimum wage at a living wage value.
- s73v3r_ 8y ago
  I cannot disagree more. It's a "minimum wage". What good is it if it's not a living wage? What's the point of having a minimum wage that one cannot survive on?
  - plasticchris 8y ago
    Because not everyone needs to survive on it. As pointed out above students and the elderly can easily be priced out of the labor market if the minimum wage is pegged to this standard.