4 ms·

> To improve workers’ wages across the board, the report calls for local and state government to support workers’ rights to organize, adopt better labor standar

> To improve workers’ wages across the board, the report calls for local and state government to support workers’ rights to organize, adopt better labor standards for subcontracted workers, increase taxes on corporate headquarters and provide affordable housing. Nobody claims the solution is CEO-mandated "artificial" wage inflation, the report emphasizes the need for strong workers unions that can demand more equitable pay. The problem is that the unionizing workforce needs to have some basic level of skill or expertise with machinery or the business process that isn't easily replaceable. That and they need to be legal citizens, which isn't always a given in agriculture/food services/landscaping jobs. And provide something that a team in India/Ukraine can't. We are "here" (large and growing inequality) because our educational system is failing to emphasize and produce the necessary amount of high skilled workers that can replenish the middle class through the value of their skilled labor. But more fundamentally we are here because the pace of innovation in technology is slowing to a crawl, there are hardly any new machines being invented in silicon valley that take new skills to operate and generate real returns to raise the average American's standard of living. Most of what I observe from startups is either garbage powered by the ad economy, solutions looking for a problem, or get-rich blockchain/AI/ML get-rich-quick schemes looking for an easy VC buck.

dunpeal 8y ago
> Nobody claims the solution is CEO-mandated "artificial" wage inflation, the report emphasizes the need for strong workers unions that can demand more equitable pay. The report suggested multiple policies to attain "wage equality", including increased taxation and forcing companies to increase pay for subcontractors. The result of such policies would be downwards redistribution: less pay for high-skilled workers, more pay for low-skilled workers. I'm sure you don't think that "wage equality" means that janitors in SV start making $250+ like senior engineers. That is not sustainable. Any realistic solution would bring engineers way down, while lifting the bottom a little bit higher. I'm not sure when "equitable pay" became a goal. In a healthy free market, people are rewarded for their effort in developing rare and valuable skills. As far as I know, a market in which the government actively intervenes to keep all wages equal is called communism. If the government wants to take action, perhaps they should work to make SV more affordable for everyone, for example, by lifting ridiculous NIMBY restrictions that keep housing expensive. All those "high paid engineers" still can't afford a home anywhere near SF. Somehow I doubt the solution is to cut further into their pay.
- mhjas 8y ago
  There are reasons to believe that the free market isn't healthy at all when it comes to labor. Low salaries for low-skilled labor enable companies to delay modernization, automation and other increases in efficiency. High salaries for high-skilled labor creates inflationary spirals for things like housing. There is absolutely reasons to believe that equalizing pay, across companies rather than occupations, could be part of the solution. Less efficient companies underpaying their employees would fold. More efficient companies would get more money to hire even more people. Prices would stabilize, careers would likely be more predictable. This was part of economic policy in Sweden in the ~1960s and as far as I can tell generally considered successful. Though it will, and did, also created large wealth inequality without other measures.
  - dunpeal 8y ago
    > Low salaries for low-skilled labor enable companies to delay modernization, automation and other increases in efficiency. I don't see that modernization or automation have been kept back in the US due to unequal wages. They are "kept back" until the exact moment they become cheaper than human labor, then they effectively take over. > High salaries for high-skilled labor creates inflationary spirals for things like housing. High salaries for anyone create inflationary pressures. In fact, high salaries for a relatively small group would do this far less than paying everyone more, as the article suggests. I'm wary of government intervention in the market because every case I've examined deeply enough turned out to be a failure.
    - roymurdock 8y ago
      would you call federal and state-mandated minimum wages, which generally allow service and low-skilled workers access to a decent home somewhat near their place of employment, a failure? high salaries create inflation at different rates for different groups of people depending on their marginal propensity to consume. if you give $5k to someone living on $20k vs $200k annual income, the $20k person is much more likely to spend most or all of that $5k on food, housing, etc. - variables that directly affect inflation. the $200k person may invest it or save it in a bank account, removing it from M0 and M1 so it doesn't show up in the inflation statistics, or in the price you pay for staple goods. this is a large part of the reason we're not seeing any inflation today even though unemployment is historically low - there are no wage gains going to the lower earners who have a high propensity to consume and spend. there always has to be a balance between those who own the capital and those who work the capital for society to function. otherwise the free market functioning without any ethical or moral underpinnings would return us to slavery - ownership of other human beings as just another form of capital

dunpeal 8y ago

> Nobody claims the solution is CEO-mandated "artificial" wage inflation, the report emphasizes the need for strong workers unions that can demand more equitable pay. The report suggested multiple policies to attain "wage equality", including increased taxation and forcing companies to increase pay for subcontractors. The result of such policies would be downwards redistribution: less pay for high-skilled workers, more pay for low-skilled workers. I'm sure you don't think that "wage equality" means that janitors in SV start making $250+ like senior engineers. That is not sustainable. Any realistic solution would bring engineers way down, while lifting the bottom a little bit higher. I'm not sure when "equitable pay" became a goal. In a healthy free market, people are rewarded for their effort in developing rare and valuable skills. As far as I know, a market in which the government actively intervenes to keep all wages equal is called communism. If the government wants to take action, perhaps they should work to make SV more affordable for everyone, for example, by lifting ridiculous NIMBY restrictions that keep housing expensive. All those "high paid engineers" still can't afford a home anywhere near SF. Somehow I doubt the solution is to cut further into their pay.

mhjas 8y ago
There are reasons to believe that the free market isn't healthy at all when it comes to labor. Low salaries for low-skilled labor enable companies to delay modernization, automation and other increases in efficiency. High salaries for high-skilled labor creates inflationary spirals for things like housing. There is absolutely reasons to believe that equalizing pay, across companies rather than occupations, could be part of the solution. Less efficient companies underpaying their employees would fold. More efficient companies would get more money to hire even more people. Prices would stabilize, careers would likely be more predictable. This was part of economic policy in Sweden in the ~1960s and as far as I can tell generally considered successful. Though it will, and did, also created large wealth inequality without other measures.
- dunpeal 8y ago
  > Low salaries for low-skilled labor enable companies to delay modernization, automation and other increases in efficiency. I don't see that modernization or automation have been kept back in the US due to unequal wages. They are "kept back" until the exact moment they become cheaper than human labor, then they effectively take over. > High salaries for high-skilled labor creates inflationary spirals for things like housing. High salaries for anyone create inflationary pressures. In fact, high salaries for a relatively small group would do this far less than paying everyone more, as the article suggests. I'm wary of government intervention in the market because every case I've examined deeply enough turned out to be a failure.
  - roymurdock 8y ago
    would you call federal and state-mandated minimum wages, which generally allow service and low-skilled workers access to a decent home somewhat near their place of employment, a failure? high salaries create inflation at different rates for different groups of people depending on their marginal propensity to consume. if you give $5k to someone living on $20k vs $200k annual income, the $20k person is much more likely to spend most or all of that $5k on food, housing, etc. - variables that directly affect inflation. the $200k person may invest it or save it in a bank account, removing it from M0 and M1 so it doesn't show up in the inflation statistics, or in the price you pay for staple goods. this is a large part of the reason we're not seeing any inflation today even though unemployment is historically low - there are no wage gains going to the lower earners who have a high propensity to consume and spend. there always has to be a balance between those who own the capital and those who work the capital for society to function. otherwise the free market functioning without any ethical or moral underpinnings would return us to slavery - ownership of other human beings as just another form of capital