3 ms·

https://academictimes.com/economic-news-reporting-suffers-from-bias-toward-richest-americans/ https://academictimes.com/economic-news-reporting-suffers-fr... N

by ep103 5y ago

https://academictimes.com/economic-news-reporting-suffers-from-bias-toward-richest-americans/ https://academictimes.com/economic-news-reporting-suffers-fr... No. News sources are focusing on business instead of labor's issues, because news statistically favors business interests, not labor's. If your hypothetical business owner is unable to start a business without paying a reasonable wage, then that business should not exist. And your hypothetical business owner should invest in Apple, Facebook, or otherwise. If this causes less business entrepreneurship, then so be it. A business that cannot pay employees is not a business that adds value to society, and nothing of value is lost. This is a fundamental tenet of capitalism, the same way we say that businesses that cannot sell their product also deserve to fail.

ozim 5y ago
But that is creating tragedy of commons that we have now. People who are having money are investing in stocks or ETFs, buying real estate because it is still better than having cash. Which inflates stocks/real estate bubble and when it bursts it will be much bigger mess than paying low wages but in constant manner, spread out over multiple people and multiple years. I definitely did not write about business that cannot pay its employees. I wrote about business that lets people put the food on the table, which means also pay the bills.
- objectivetruth 5y ago
  So, society has a problem where some people are so poor that some of them die and many barely survive... and other people in that society have so much money that they're converting it into electricity. I think eventually equilibrium will come in some fashion and it likely won't be the rich spontaneously deciding to generously share.
- ShroudedNight 5y ago
  > buying real estate Tax positive externalities at 100%
foota 5y ago
"If this causes less business entrepreneurship, then so be it. A business that cannot pay employees is not a business that adds value to society, and nothing of value is lost. This is a fundamental tenet of capitalism, the same way we say that businesses that cannot sell their product also deserve to fail." This is a false and dangerous, in that it ignores that the world isn't a free market, wage markets don't exist in a vacuum. Businesses might be able to pay higher wages if they weren't hindered by high rents, or if other restaurants raise prices in unison (e.g., in reaction to higher labor prices). Just because a business can't pay a living wage in some setup doesn't mean it has no contribution.
FFRefresh 5y ago
What's a reasonable wage? Should any business in developing countries exist, given the incredibly low wages? Their wages can't be considered reasonable, right?
- dmitriid 5y ago
  You just compared the US to developing nations. It's an apt comparison.
inglor_cz 5y ago
"A business that cannot pay employees is not a business that adds value to society, and nothing of value is lost." Value is a tricky expression here. There is a short term value and a long term value, and they may be very different. Let us say that a mom-and-pop restaurant that cooks fairly healthy meals is squeezed out by McDonalds and shuts down. 50 years down the line, the fast food triumph has serious consequences on health of the nation. But immediate market interactions cannot capture this development. The short term "Yay for salty and sugary food for less money!" win does not include the fact that you are buying an invisible "Type 2 diabetes and morbid obesity at the age of 40" item, too.

by ep103 5y ago

ozim 5y ago

But that is creating tragedy of commons that we have now. People who are having money are investing in stocks or ETFs, buying real estate because it is still better than having cash. Which inflates stocks/real estate bubble and when it bursts it will be much bigger mess than paying low wages but in constant manner, spread out over multiple people and multiple years. I definitely did not write about business that cannot pay its employees. I wrote about business that lets people put the food on the table, which means also pay the bills.

objectivetruth 5y ago
So, society has a problem where some people are so poor that some of them die and many barely survive... and other people in that society have so much money that they're converting it into electricity. I think eventually equilibrium will come in some fashion and it likely won't be the rich spontaneously deciding to generously share.
ShroudedNight 5y ago
> buying real estate Tax positive externalities at 100%

foota 5y ago

"If this causes less business entrepreneurship, then so be it. A business that cannot pay employees is not a business that adds value to society, and nothing of value is lost. This is a fundamental tenet of capitalism, the same way we say that businesses that cannot sell their product also deserve to fail." This is a false and dangerous, in that it ignores that the world isn't a free market, wage markets don't exist in a vacuum. Businesses might be able to pay higher wages if they weren't hindered by high rents, or if other restaurants raise prices in unison (e.g., in reaction to higher labor prices). Just because a business can't pay a living wage in some setup doesn't mean it has no contribution.

FFRefresh 5y ago

What's a reasonable wage? Should any business in developing countries exist, given the incredibly low wages? Their wages can't be considered reasonable, right?

dmitriid 5y ago
You just compared the US to developing nations. It's an apt comparison.

inglor_cz 5y ago

"A business that cannot pay employees is not a business that adds value to society, and nothing of value is lost." Value is a tricky expression here. There is a short term value and a long term value, and they may be very different. Let us say that a mom-and-pop restaurant that cooks fairly healthy meals is squeezed out by McDonalds and shuts down. 50 years down the line, the fast food triumph has serious consequences on health of the nation. But immediate market interactions cannot capture this development. The short term "Yay for salty and sugary food for less money!" win does not include the fact that you are buying an invisible "Type 2 diabetes and morbid obesity at the age of 40" item, too.