3 ms·
The argument would be that they are rational actors and are choosing to be better off when they choose the job.
by LanceH 7y ago
The argument would be that they are rational actors and are choosing to be better off when they choose the job.
- EliRivers 7y agoIs that an axiom that leads to the principle that their wages should reflect supply and demand? A moral judgement is being made here when someone says this is how things should be, this is what's right.
- ionised 7y agoThat's the homo-economicus argument and it's fallen flat a great many times. Humans act irrationally all the time.
- LanceH 7y agoIt's humans that would be enacting regulations, too. With market pricing, the people involved are responsible for their own irrational behavior.
- EliRivers 7y agoWith market pricing, the people involved are responsible for their own irrational behavior. Brilliant. It's all their own choice. They should have chosen to be born into a rich family. They should have chosen an expensive education. They should have chosen good health. They should have chosen a job that pays millions. All this, of course, is commonly believed in the US. I sometimes suspect that actually it's not so much believed as just something that rich people want very much to believe; it means they can feel like they deserve and earned every last penny, and that they don't have to feel bad at all about all the people being screwed over.