3 ms·

How is the problem that workers accept lower wages, rather than employers proposing them?

hayksaakian 8y ago
Because if workers did not accept those wages their companies would not function That's what strikes and things like that are for
- kylestlb 8y ago
  Can't really go on strike without organized labor, which requires a union or something similar. I don't think many unions for uber, amazon eats, doordash contractors exist. It's very interesting how some of the most highly paid contract-based workers in the USA have the strongest unions - actors and professional athletes.
- moorhosj 8y ago
  If workers didn’t accept those wages they would be destitute. Companies (capital) hold all of the power in our current economic system, it hasn’t always been like this in the US and isn’t in many other countries.
  - x0AC77B2 8y ago
    If I could only find work at $8/hr that is my fault. I could get a student loan and go to a trade school or study CS and make $80k+ in 3 years. Any adult that requires to care for a family and chooses to work for $8/hr is harming themselves.
    - moorhosj 8y ago
      Unless you already have a family to care for, or can't afford to stop working for 3 years to take classes, or can't afford health insurance, or any of a million other reasons that life may not be as simple as you make it out. If everyone joined the trades, the supply of trade workers would increase and their hourly wages would go down.
- coldtea 8y ago
  Ever tried to find work to feed yourself (not work to make money AND feed yourself, merely to be able to afford food and basic rent)? Ever lived 1 paycheck away from being thrown to the street? People are not "willing", they are desperate to not end up sleeping under a bridge.
x0AC77B2 8y ago
Well if I want to open a coffee shop and hire highschool students at $8/hr, as an employer I should be able to do that. But if someone who requires to provide for a family and needs $20/hr is willing to work for $8/hr at my coffee shop, that is their fault, not mine.
- Sharlin 8y ago
  And how much choice do you think they have?
  - x0AC77B2 8y ago
    They are clearly desperate for work. Bettering yourself via education at a trade school, or University is not difficult. But if you got a degree in Psychology and now work at a coffee shop for $8/hr to support a family, you put yourself in that situation.
    - Sharlin 8y ago
      I... I don't even. This demonstrates such a fundamental disconnect from the reality of people living on subsistence level that it's not even funny.
- CapacitorSet 8y ago
  How is the fault for low wages on the worker, and not the employer? Why is the employer granted the freedom to push unlivable wages, rather than the worker being granted the right to be paid livable wages?
  - closeparen 8y ago
    Starting from the proposition that the worker has a right to a decent living, a minimum wage statue is a terrible way to get there: the employer always has the freedom to "push" no work at all and deploy his capital elsewhere, leaving everyone strictly worse off. As the gig economy companies did just a few years ago, when they didn't exist. It's much cleaner to tax the employer class's excess income, however it's earned, and redistribute it to "gross up" the worker class to whatever the minimum wage would be. Then employers don't have the option of shifting their investment to automation, self-service, less labor-intensive industries, etc. to avoid the concession.

Because if workers did not accept those wages their companies would not function That's what strikes and things like that are for

kylestlb 8y ago
Can't really go on strike without organized labor, which requires a union or something similar. I don't think many unions for uber, amazon eats, doordash contractors exist. It's very interesting how some of the most highly paid contract-based workers in the USA have the strongest unions - actors and professional athletes.
moorhosj 8y ago
If workers didn’t accept those wages they would be destitute. Companies (capital) hold all of the power in our current economic system, it hasn’t always been like this in the US and isn’t in many other countries.
- x0AC77B2 8y ago
  If I could only find work at $8/hr that is my fault. I could get a student loan and go to a trade school or study CS and make $80k+ in 3 years. Any adult that requires to care for a family and chooses to work for $8/hr is harming themselves.
  - moorhosj 8y ago
    Unless you already have a family to care for, or can't afford to stop working for 3 years to take classes, or can't afford health insurance, or any of a million other reasons that life may not be as simple as you make it out. If everyone joined the trades, the supply of trade workers would increase and their hourly wages would go down.
coldtea 8y ago
Ever tried to find work to feed yourself (not work to make money AND feed yourself, merely to be able to afford food and basic rent)? Ever lived 1 paycheck away from being thrown to the street? People are not "willing", they are desperate to not end up sleeping under a bridge.

x0AC77B2 8y ago

Well if I want to open a coffee shop and hire highschool students at $8/hr, as an employer I should be able to do that. But if someone who requires to provide for a family and needs $20/hr is willing to work for $8/hr at my coffee shop, that is their fault, not mine.

Sharlin 8y ago
And how much choice do you think they have?
- x0AC77B2 8y ago
  They are clearly desperate for work. Bettering yourself via education at a trade school, or University is not difficult. But if you got a degree in Psychology and now work at a coffee shop for $8/hr to support a family, you put yourself in that situation.
  - Sharlin 8y ago
    I... I don't even. This demonstrates such a fundamental disconnect from the reality of people living on subsistence level that it's not even funny.
CapacitorSet 8y ago
How is the fault for low wages on the worker, and not the employer? Why is the employer granted the freedom to push unlivable wages, rather than the worker being granted the right to be paid livable wages?
- closeparen 8y ago
  Starting from the proposition that the worker has a right to a decent living, a minimum wage statue is a terrible way to get there: the employer always has the freedom to "push" no work at all and deploy his capital elsewhere, leaving everyone strictly worse off. As the gig economy companies did just a few years ago, when they didn't exist. It's much cleaner to tax the employer class's excess income, however it's earned, and redistribute it to "gross up" the worker class to whatever the minimum wage would be. Then employers don't have the option of shifting their investment to automation, self-service, less labor-intensive industries, etc. to avoid the concession.