4 ms·

> That's not what a free market means. It looks like in this thread people have different definitions of free market. For me, the fundamental property is that

> That's not what a free market means. It looks like in this thread people have different definitions of free market. For me, the fundamental property is that supply and demand respond elastically to price changes, and a quick test (necessary, not sufficient) is the following: if the price asked by buyers is too low, does supply stop? For example (and simplifying), if people wanted to pay just $1 for consoles, the supply of consoles would drop because it's not profitable, so it could be a free market. Now, for jobs, if companies wanted to pay just $1 an hour, would people stop working? Given that their alternative is starving, they probably wouldn't. So the job market can't be a free market. > And I don't know how you can say companies have more power in negotiation. They post their rates, and people apply or they don't. There are millions of alternative jobs. If I sell my car, I post the price and if I don't like the offer, I don't take it. Are you claiming that this is not an aspect of the free market? A car and a job are very, very different things. You can live without a car, you can't live without a job. If the available offer of cars is too bad, you won't get a car (well, maybe you need to because you need a means of transport). If the available offer of jobs is too bad, you will still get a job because you need income to live. > A friend of mine is a shift supervisor at a food supplier... I don't know how this is related to the debate at hand. Do you know the situations and motivations of those people? > There are wages that people will just not work for. Even if minimum wage laws were lifted, people aren't going to go work at MacDonald's for $1/hr. IIRC, current minimum wage puts people below the poverty line. Why do people go to work on that? Maybe because they have no alternative? > And you also see this will undocumented labour (i.e. where minimum wage regulations are ignored) Which is a separate problem. Any regulation of any kind will push incentives towards undocumented labor. That's not an argument against regulation, it's an argument for better oversight. > Sure they can. What are you talking about? Tens of millions of people, for all kinds of reasons, either choose not to work, or choose to work part-time. Working part-time is working. And if you've found the formula to live without income, please share it.

macspoofing 6y ago
>It looks like in this thread people have different definitions of free market. No. Words have meaning. You made up a definition for 'free market'. >For me ... Well how about we use the general understanding free market? It just makes it easier when you don't redefine common terms. But OK ... >Now, for jobs, if companies wanted to pay just $1 an hour, would people stop working? Yes. They would indeed not bother working. But try it. I can guarantee you that even poor migrant workers would laugh at you if you offered them that kind of wage. >Given that their alternative is starving, they probably wouldn't That is not an alternative. I'm not even sure if there was a single case of starvation in the last few decades that was a result of lack of income or lack of a job. On the other hand, plenty of starvation in Soviet Russia ... with full employment! >You can live without a car, you can't live without a job. This is just pure gaslighiting. Unemployed people do not die. What are you talking about? >Which is a separate problem. No. It's not. It is an unregulated market where minimum wage laws are ignored, and yet, you don't see a race to the bottom. The wage settles at some equilibrium. And yes, skilled labour even in that type of environment will be much much higher than minimum wage. It kills your argument because clearly minimum wage laws are not the thing that prevent a race to the bottom, but rather, you know ... market forces. Do you also realize there are countries with modern economies that either do not have minimum wage laws, or have one that is much lower. >And if you've found the formula to live without income, please share it. That's not what you said. You wrote: "Workers can't usually live too much without finding a job." But even with this, let me throw it back at you. There are tens of millions of people without income or a job - how do they survive?
- gjulianm 6y ago
  > But try it. I can guarantee you that even poor migrant workers would laugh at you if you offered them that kind of wage. You're imagining a company offering low wages in world where the rest offer higher wages. In that example, I'm saying all companies offer low wages. It's an artificial example, of course, but shows how labor market is not elastic, and therefore cannot be a free market. I don't know which definition of free market you use, but I haven't seen anyone that accommodates that situation. > That is not an alternative. I'm not even sure if there was a single case of starvation in the last few decades that was a result of lack of income or lack of a job. Well, if you want to take things literally, replace "starve" by "stop having a decent life". Losing your house, for example. > On the other hand, plenty of starvation in Soviet Russia ... with full employment! Hey, if your argument against worker rights is going to boil down to "but Soviet Russia and communism bad!" we can stop right now. > Unemployed people do not die. Yeah, people without work just chill. Nobody needs to work to eat, or pay their house, or their car, or their bills. > No. It's not. It is an unregulated market where minimum wage laws are ignored, and yet, you don't see a race to the bottom. The wage settles at some equilibrium. One of the biggest collectives of undocumented workers in the US are farmworkers. Read on the conditions of those people (e.g., [1]) and tell me it's not a race to the bottom. I couldn't find stats regarding their wages, but I don't assume they're good. The only studies I've found say that undocumented workers will earn less than their documented counterparts even after adjusting for skills and education [2]. It's of course a complex issue and analyzing the causes of a certain wage level in a certain sector are pretty complex. But the incentives are clearly there for companies to push for wages way below a livable level. 1: https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/stateline/2016/05/02/struggle-to-provide-housing-for-migrant-farmworkers https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/sta... 2: https://econofact.org/what-explains-the-wages-of-undocumented-workers https://econofact.org/what-explains-the-wages-of-undocumente... > That's not what you said. You wrote: "Workers can't usually live too much without finding a job." Do you mean people living on subsidies? Well, that's precisely what I'm advocating for with that example. If you want, I can complete the sentence with "Workers can't usually live too much without finding a job and no income". > There are tens of millions of people without income or a job - how do they survive? Where and in what conditions? Because if you're arguing that minimum wage laws are not necessary because if you're jobless and homeless you won't die right away, well...

macspoofing 6y ago

>It looks like in this thread people have different definitions of free market. No. Words have meaning. You made up a definition for 'free market'. >For me ... Well how about we use the general understanding free market? It just makes it easier when you don't redefine common terms. But OK ... >Now, for jobs, if companies wanted to pay just $1 an hour, would people stop working? Yes. They would indeed not bother working. But try it. I can guarantee you that even poor migrant workers would laugh at you if you offered them that kind of wage. >Given that their alternative is starving, they probably wouldn't That is not an alternative. I'm not even sure if there was a single case of starvation in the last few decades that was a result of lack of income or lack of a job. On the other hand, plenty of starvation in Soviet Russia ... with full employment! >You can live without a car, you can't live without a job. This is just pure gaslighiting. Unemployed people do not die. What are you talking about? >Which is a separate problem. No. It's not. It is an unregulated market where minimum wage laws are ignored, and yet, you don't see a race to the bottom. The wage settles at some equilibrium. And yes, skilled labour even in that type of environment will be much much higher than minimum wage. It kills your argument because clearly minimum wage laws are not the thing that prevent a race to the bottom, but rather, you know ... market forces. Do you also realize there are countries with modern economies that either do not have minimum wage laws, or have one that is much lower. >And if you've found the formula to live without income, please share it. That's not what you said. You wrote: "Workers can't usually live too much without finding a job." But even with this, let me throw it back at you. There are tens of millions of people without income or a job - how do they survive?

gjulianm 6y ago
> But try it. I can guarantee you that even poor migrant workers would laugh at you if you offered them that kind of wage. You're imagining a company offering low wages in world where the rest offer higher wages. In that example, I'm saying all companies offer low wages. It's an artificial example, of course, but shows how labor market is not elastic, and therefore cannot be a free market. I don't know which definition of free market you use, but I haven't seen anyone that accommodates that situation. > That is not an alternative. I'm not even sure if there was a single case of starvation in the last few decades that was a result of lack of income or lack of a job. Well, if you want to take things literally, replace "starve" by "stop having a decent life". Losing your house, for example. > On the other hand, plenty of starvation in Soviet Russia ... with full employment! Hey, if your argument against worker rights is going to boil down to "but Soviet Russia and communism bad!" we can stop right now. > Unemployed people do not die. Yeah, people without work just chill. Nobody needs to work to eat, or pay their house, or their car, or their bills. > No. It's not. It is an unregulated market where minimum wage laws are ignored, and yet, you don't see a race to the bottom. The wage settles at some equilibrium. One of the biggest collectives of undocumented workers in the US are farmworkers. Read on the conditions of those people (e.g., [1]) and tell me it's not a race to the bottom. I couldn't find stats regarding their wages, but I don't assume they're good. The only studies I've found say that undocumented workers will earn less than their documented counterparts even after adjusting for skills and education [2]. It's of course a complex issue and analyzing the causes of a certain wage level in a certain sector are pretty complex. But the incentives are clearly there for companies to push for wages way below a livable level. 1: https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/stateline/2016/05/02/struggle-to-provide-housing-for-migrant-farmworkers https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/sta... 2: https://econofact.org/what-explains-the-wages-of-undocumented-workers https://econofact.org/what-explains-the-wages-of-undocumente... > That's not what you said. You wrote: "Workers can't usually live too much without finding a job." Do you mean people living on subsidies? Well, that's precisely what I'm advocating for with that example. If you want, I can complete the sentence with "Workers can't usually live too much without finding a job and no income". > There are tens of millions of people without income or a job - how do they survive? Where and in what conditions? Because if you're arguing that minimum wage laws are not necessary because if you're jobless and homeless you won't die right away, well...