4 ms·

> You can believe this with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength, but it will not change the inescapable law of economics that hiring someone at a wage whic

> You can believe this with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength, but it will not change the inescapable law of economics that hiring someone at a wage which is higher than the value they produce is called charity. So mega-charity for boardroom vampires and Big Finance thumb-twiddlers is acceptable, but not for workers? I don't follow your reasoning as it relates to reality. It is possible to govern a society that doesn't worship money above all else. It's okay to be charitable.

missedthecue 6y ago
Tell me why it's in my interest to pay $20/hr to someone who will only perform work generating an equivalent of $13/hr in value? I'd be better off not hiring him. Remember; using those laws to mandate a minimum wage does not mean that everyone is entitled to that wage. It means many just legally cannot sell their labour. It's mandatory hiring discrimination.
- krapp 6y ago
  It's not in your interest. It's in your interest to pay your employees as little as possible regardless of the value they produce. Your determination of the value of their labor being worth $13.00/hr is based not on any objective calculus, but the subjective nature of the labor market. You would of course pay less for the same work if you could, as your objection to the existence of minimum wage laws demonstrates. It is in the interest of society, however, that your employees are able to feed and clothe themselves, find shelter and medical care, and participate in capital transactions with the ability to pay their debts. Society forces you to afford your employees a modicum of dignity and value above that of livestock, furniture or raw materials, despite the fact that, in the cold calculus of supply and demand, cost and profit, they are precisely the same - purchased assets from which business value is to be extracted. The inconvenience of having to consider the human condition in your valuation of human employees is the cost you pay for civilization and the benefits it provides (among which is a labor force to exploit) and the cost civil society pays to suffer sociopaths who would only consider ethics in their capitalism at the point of a gun.
  - ChrisLomont 6y ago
    > as your objection to the existence of minimum wage laws demonstrates. Can we make the min wage $1000/hr? Why not? Once you understand why not, you must admit there is a tradeoff between price floors and employment. The higher the min wage, the less people can produce that value, so they're unemployed. The CBO estimates around 1 million people will lose jobs as a result of a $15 min wage. Those people will certainly not be better off. And, if they're priced out of the job market, they will lose the opportunity to get work experience and move to higher wages, as virtually everyone that gets a job does. Almost no one has the same wage their entire life. If you think the value paid is unrelated to value added, then if a person could add a ton of value for the employer, more of those companies would spring up. Then as there is less people to employ, they have to compete for employees to absorb this free money you claim exists. Finally, the wages are forced to near the sustainable level for both sides. Look at some SEC filings for company profits versus salary paid to employees. Profits do not, per employee, support your claim.

missedthecue 6y ago

Tell me why it's in my interest to pay $20/hr to someone who will only perform work generating an equivalent of $13/hr in value? I'd be better off not hiring him. Remember; using those laws to mandate a minimum wage does not mean that everyone is entitled to that wage. It means many just legally cannot sell their labour. It's mandatory hiring discrimination.

krapp 6y ago
It's not in your interest. It's in your interest to pay your employees as little as possible regardless of the value they produce. Your determination of the value of their labor being worth $13.00/hr is based not on any objective calculus, but the subjective nature of the labor market. You would of course pay less for the same work if you could, as your objection to the existence of minimum wage laws demonstrates. It is in the interest of society, however, that your employees are able to feed and clothe themselves, find shelter and medical care, and participate in capital transactions with the ability to pay their debts. Society forces you to afford your employees a modicum of dignity and value above that of livestock, furniture or raw materials, despite the fact that, in the cold calculus of supply and demand, cost and profit, they are precisely the same - purchased assets from which business value is to be extracted. The inconvenience of having to consider the human condition in your valuation of human employees is the cost you pay for civilization and the benefits it provides (among which is a labor force to exploit) and the cost civil society pays to suffer sociopaths who would only consider ethics in their capitalism at the point of a gun.
- ChrisLomont 6y ago
  > as your objection to the existence of minimum wage laws demonstrates. Can we make the min wage $1000/hr? Why not? Once you understand why not, you must admit there is a tradeoff between price floors and employment. The higher the min wage, the less people can produce that value, so they're unemployed. The CBO estimates around 1 million people will lose jobs as a result of a $15 min wage. Those people will certainly not be better off. And, if they're priced out of the job market, they will lose the opportunity to get work experience and move to higher wages, as virtually everyone that gets a job does. Almost no one has the same wage their entire life. If you think the value paid is unrelated to value added, then if a person could add a ton of value for the employer, more of those companies would spring up. Then as there is less people to employ, they have to compete for employees to absorb this free money you claim exists. Finally, the wages are forced to near the sustainable level for both sides. Look at some SEC filings for company profits versus salary paid to employees. Profits do not, per employee, support your claim.