3 ms·
> Also there will always be a bottom, unless we had exact equality of outcomes, which is for various reasons impossible You're taking the parent way too litera
by comex 6y ago
> Also there will always be a bottom, unless we had exact equality of outcomes, which is for various reasons impossible
You're taking the parent way too literally. If you look at the rest of the post, they mention "number of people at the lower end of today's income scale" (emphasis added), "people in poverty", and people "hav[ing] the problems you're describing" (not being able to afford a car). Their argument is clearly that nobody will be left at the point corresponding to today's bottom, not that there won't be any bottom.
- throwaway201103 6y agoNone of this changes the real value of an Uber ride, or whatever low-wage job you care to imagine. If it becomes more expensive because drivers are being paid an artificially higher wage, then either (some) people will stop using Uber, and (some of) those jobs will vanish, or there will be inflation up the line until the buying power of the new higher wages recalibrates with the real value of the work being performed.
- baryphonic 6y agoThis is why I added another qualification based on a looser interpretation, if you read my whole post. It's immediately after the quoted paragraph.