3 ms·

It has already been for centuries, that's why unions even ever became necessary.

scarface74 7y ago
Do you want your labor to be a commodity where you are told by government edict that you can only make 10% above poverty level?
- chii 7y ago
  > 10% above poverty level that is not what the comment is about - you added the above poverty bit yourself. The idea that labour is a commodity is something _companies_ created when industrialization occured, and even though it sucked for artisans who previously commanded high wages, commodity workers were the reason products became cheaper (as well as machines & industrialization). Just because you're a commodity worker, doesn't mean you have to be poor. If your skill is in demand, you can still command high prices for it (which is what programmers of today are). I don't doubt that one day, the needs of skills of programming are going to fall off a cliff (i.e., due to AI). But programming as a skill today is still a commodity, and that is a good outcome.
  - scarface74 7y ago
    No what I’m asking is that if you want all products - including your labor operating like the “radio model”, that means you want the government deciding what a fair wage should be and deciding that everyone should get that wage. He thinks that 10% is a fair profit. Who should decide?
    - kuschku 7y ago
      (a) https://media.giphy.com/media/uiYgcNCdXfrck/giphy.gif https://media.giphy.com/media/uiYgcNCdXfrck/giphy.gif — I am no man ;) (b) If you earn 2500$ a month, do you actually have 250$/month after all expenses are paid? I don’t. I’m happy if I have any money left at the end of the month. An average employee has no savings whatsoever, and can’t even fully pay all their expenses. 95% of the western world would be happy if they would have 10% of their income left after expenses at the end of the month. 100% of the rest of the world would be happy with even any money left at the end of the month. Companies are making far more profit than any single employee ever could dream of, often with massive profit ratios (Target and Walmart are at 25% to 30%, as is Google — that’d mean 830$ left after expenses for a person earning 2500$!), and many of the companies with the highest profit ratios are pure middlemen, providing no real benefit at all.
      - scarface74 7y ago
        Well, if the “middleman is providing no benefit”, then why would you want the government to force policies that don’t allow Disney to own its own streaming service and force it to deliver its content through other companies - ie middlemen. But, you are still avoiding the central question. If you want to have the government force Disney to use middlemen because you think it’s unfair for them to be both the producer and the distributor, why single out movie producers and not software makers, authors, producers or even physical good makers? Should Apple also not be able to have Apple stores and be forced to only sale products through “middlemen who bring no real benefit at all”?

Do you want your labor to be a commodity where you are told by government edict that you can only make 10% above poverty level?

chii 7y ago
> 10% above poverty level that is not what the comment is about - you added the above poverty bit yourself. The idea that labour is a commodity is something _companies_ created when industrialization occured, and even though it sucked for artisans who previously commanded high wages, commodity workers were the reason products became cheaper (as well as machines & industrialization). Just because you're a commodity worker, doesn't mean you have to be poor. If your skill is in demand, you can still command high prices for it (which is what programmers of today are). I don't doubt that one day, the needs of skills of programming are going to fall off a cliff (i.e., due to AI). But programming as a skill today is still a commodity, and that is a good outcome.
- scarface74 7y ago
  No what I’m asking is that if you want all products - including your labor operating like the “radio model”, that means you want the government deciding what a fair wage should be and deciding that everyone should get that wage. He thinks that 10% is a fair profit. Who should decide?
  - kuschku 7y ago
    (a) https://media.giphy.com/media/uiYgcNCdXfrck/giphy.gif https://media.giphy.com/media/uiYgcNCdXfrck/giphy.gif — I am no man ;) (b) If you earn 2500$ a month, do you actually have 250$/month after all expenses are paid? I don’t. I’m happy if I have any money left at the end of the month. An average employee has no savings whatsoever, and can’t even fully pay all their expenses. 95% of the western world would be happy if they would have 10% of their income left after expenses at the end of the month. 100% of the rest of the world would be happy with even any money left at the end of the month. Companies are making far more profit than any single employee ever could dream of, often with massive profit ratios (Target and Walmart are at 25% to 30%, as is Google — that’d mean 830$ left after expenses for a person earning 2500$!), and many of the companies with the highest profit ratios are pure middlemen, providing no real benefit at all.
    - scarface74 7y ago
      Well, if the “middleman is providing no benefit”, then why would you want the government to force policies that don’t allow Disney to own its own streaming service and force it to deliver its content through other companies - ie middlemen. But, you are still avoiding the central question. If you want to have the government force Disney to use middlemen because you think it’s unfair for them to be both the producer and the distributor, why single out movie producers and not software makers, authors, producers or even physical good makers? Should Apple also not be able to have Apple stores and be forced to only sale products through “middlemen who bring no real benefit at all”?