7 ms·

In a truly free market with no government fingers on the scale no worker would ever work for less than is required to live or at least they wouldn't work for lo

In a truly free market with no government fingers on the scale no worker would ever work for less than is required to live or at least they wouldn't work for long at such a wage. People factor in the assistance they expect to receive when taking a job in terms of food, healthcare, and money when they take a job that will with assistance provide them the means to live. It is not unheard of at some low paying employers to guide new employees to benefit programs to help them meet their needs. In effect such programs reduce the market clearing price for labor at the expense of other tax payers. Such program often require that the recipients work but not for how much. At the limit sufficiently generous benefits could inspire someone to work for $1 per year and you could subsidize taco bells entire workforce but the minimum wage and the limits of federal dollars both prevent this.

andrepd 6y ago
>In a truly free market with no government fingers on the scale no worker would ever work for less than is required to live or at least they wouldn't work for long at such a wage. I don't know how you're even supposed to go from such a premise that is demonstrably, empirically false.
- michaelmrose 6y ago
  If you don't make enough to have a place to live, medicine, and food you die or at least your life falls apart. How is that false. Some people make so little money they would at that wage not be able to sustain life. These people sustain themselves via government benefits in addition to wages.
  - renewiltord 6y ago
    Well, the real truth is that we're all able to survive on very low wages. If your options are shit job that delays death 10 years or die now, you take the shit job. Bare survival is very cheap in America.
    - michaelmrose 6y ago
      Its really not. Medical care and insurance is very very expensive. Rent that is actually near somewhere you can work is very expensive. Cars are expensive. Keeping a beater running can be more expensive than making car payments on a cheapish car. There are niches wherein some can survive on little because they can rent a room or stay with family, because they don't have medical issues and can go without insurance etc etc. These are situational factors that don't scale to a whole society or even the whole of an individuals life.
      - renewiltord 6y ago
        That's definitely beyond survival. Survival is just living. I think I could survive on about $10 a day in America in the right place, i.e. I could do that indefinitely and live into my 50s. Indoor shelter isn't necessary for survival. Motor vehicles aren't essential for survival. And you go to the ER and get emergency care if you're in trouble. The base line for survival is pretty low. It's just "continue to not be dead".
        michaelmrose 6y ago
        I think you are stretching the argument beyond reasoning. Nobody would show up to walmart in between shitting in the street and sleeping in a tent and trying to live and remain healthy on food that doesn't require a fridge while hoping that nobody stole even those final earthly possessions while I was working. At some point where the bottom 25-30% are living like this people either organize and force change or collectively burn shit down and kill the rich.
        renewiltord 6y ago
        You'd think that, but my experience living in the Third World is that people will accept a lot. i.e. the market clearing price can definitely drop below what you think is the minimum wage for a decent living. All of this is just to say that, empirically, I have seen the following to not be true in the sense that you mean it (required to live being short for "required to live a decent standard of living"), though it is true in the literal sense that I described it: > In a truly free market with no government fingers on the scale no worker would ever work for less than is required to live or at least they wouldn't work for long at such a wage.
colinmhayes 6y ago
>In a truly free market with no government fingers on the scale no worker would ever work for less than is required to live Absolutely false. People will always work at the highest wage they can obtain unless they value their time above what that wage. No government assistance leads to even more people working for $1/hr because they're even more desperate.
- michaelmrose 6y ago
  And employers will pay the least that they can pay and get people in the door. The least they can possibly pay is lessor if government benefits can be used to make up the difference. Government benefits lower the floor so low that people literally couldn't live if they were paid solely in wages rather than wages + benefits.
  - colinmhayes 6y ago
    Walmart pays enough to survive without government benefits, it's just a terrible life. If an employee dies because they don't have healthcare Walmart would hire someone else.
    - michaelmrose 6y ago
      With no government benefits there would be vastly more pressure to unionize and demand better wages or just ask for more on the front end and select the employer willing to pay more.
specialist 6y ago
Faith in Freedom Markets™, in this case employer / employee relations, are rooted in a few easily dismissed misconceptions: - markets are efficient - people are rational - everyone has perfect information - there are no power imbalances Aside: Do you play poker? I've started to wonder if Freedom Markets™ advocates are familiar with that kind of meta thinking.
the_gastropod 6y ago
With all due respect, this is obviously not true. The U.S. used to literally have slave labor. Then it had child labor, uncapped workweek lengths, no safety regulations, no minimum wage, etc. The workers who died in the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory, for example, earned the equivalent of today's $3.67/hour working 52 hours per week thanks to there being "no government fingers on the scale". I know that libertarian types like to pretend government regulations just appeared into reality suddenly, without anything provoking them. But the reality is, most government regulations were put in place to save people from unsafe conditions that the free market exploited.
- jschwartzi 6y ago
  Regulation is written in blood.
- CarbyAu 6y ago
  I see Uber (and Uber-likes) as repeating this ugly history but using different organisational/communication patterns to avoid regulation.

andrepd 6y ago

>In a truly free market with no government fingers on the scale no worker would ever work for less than is required to live or at least they wouldn't work for long at such a wage. I don't know how you're even supposed to go from such a premise that is demonstrably, empirically false.

michaelmrose 6y ago
If you don't make enough to have a place to live, medicine, and food you die or at least your life falls apart. How is that false. Some people make so little money they would at that wage not be able to sustain life. These people sustain themselves via government benefits in addition to wages.
- renewiltord 6y ago
  Well, the real truth is that we're all able to survive on very low wages. If your options are shit job that delays death 10 years or die now, you take the shit job. Bare survival is very cheap in America.
  - michaelmrose 6y ago
    Its really not. Medical care and insurance is very very expensive. Rent that is actually near somewhere you can work is very expensive. Cars are expensive. Keeping a beater running can be more expensive than making car payments on a cheapish car. There are niches wherein some can survive on little because they can rent a room or stay with family, because they don't have medical issues and can go without insurance etc etc. These are situational factors that don't scale to a whole society or even the whole of an individuals life.
    - renewiltord 6y ago
      That's definitely beyond survival. Survival is just living. I think I could survive on about $10 a day in America in the right place, i.e. I could do that indefinitely and live into my 50s. Indoor shelter isn't necessary for survival. Motor vehicles aren't essential for survival. And you go to the ER and get emergency care if you're in trouble. The base line for survival is pretty low. It's just "continue to not be dead".
      - michaelmrose 6y ago
        I think you are stretching the argument beyond reasoning. Nobody would show up to walmart in between shitting in the street and sleeping in a tent and trying to live and remain healthy on food that doesn't require a fridge while hoping that nobody stole even those final earthly possessions while I was working. At some point where the bottom 25-30% are living like this people either organize and force change or collectively burn shit down and kill the rich.
        renewiltord 6y ago
        You'd think that, but my experience living in the Third World is that people will accept a lot. i.e. the market clearing price can definitely drop below what you think is the minimum wage for a decent living. All of this is just to say that, empirically, I have seen the following to not be true in the sense that you mean it (required to live being short for "required to live a decent standard of living"), though it is true in the literal sense that I described it: > In a truly free market with no government fingers on the scale no worker would ever work for less than is required to live or at least they wouldn't work for long at such a wage.

colinmhayes 6y ago

>In a truly free market with no government fingers on the scale no worker would ever work for less than is required to live Absolutely false. People will always work at the highest wage they can obtain unless they value their time above what that wage. No government assistance leads to even more people working for $1/hr because they're even more desperate.

michaelmrose 6y ago
And employers will pay the least that they can pay and get people in the door. The least they can possibly pay is lessor if government benefits can be used to make up the difference. Government benefits lower the floor so low that people literally couldn't live if they were paid solely in wages rather than wages + benefits.
- colinmhayes 6y ago
  Walmart pays enough to survive without government benefits, it's just a terrible life. If an employee dies because they don't have healthcare Walmart would hire someone else.
  - michaelmrose 6y ago
    With no government benefits there would be vastly more pressure to unionize and demand better wages or just ask for more on the front end and select the employer willing to pay more.

specialist 6y ago

Faith in Freedom Markets™, in this case employer / employee relations, are rooted in a few easily dismissed misconceptions: - markets are efficient - people are rational - everyone has perfect information - there are no power imbalances Aside: Do you play poker? I've started to wonder if Freedom Markets™ advocates are familiar with that kind of meta thinking.

the_gastropod 6y ago

With all due respect, this is obviously not true. The U.S. used to literally have slave labor. Then it had child labor, uncapped workweek lengths, no safety regulations, no minimum wage, etc. The workers who died in the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory, for example, earned the equivalent of today's $3.67/hour working 52 hours per week thanks to there being "no government fingers on the scale". I know that libertarian types like to pretend government regulations just appeared into reality suddenly, without anything provoking them. But the reality is, most government regulations were put in place to save people from unsafe conditions that the free market exploited.

jschwartzi 6y ago
Regulation is written in blood.
CarbyAu 6y ago
I see Uber (and Uber-likes) as repeating this ugly history but using different organisational/communication patterns to avoid regulation.