3 ms·
This is not wrong, but I feel you are hiding the adversity inherent to employee-employer relations. Why is there such a labor glut anways? If it's an immaterial
by Ericson2314 5y ago
This is not wrong, but I feel you are hiding the adversity inherent to employee-employer relations. Why is there such a labor glut anways? If it's an immaterial underconsumptionist / keyensian demand-shortfall type problem, how can we boost aggregate demand and broad population purchasing power. If it's some sort of supply glut / too much productivity issue, how can we all work less?
Speaking about these issues as if they are "engineering tradeoffs" ignores that the status quo is not static and universal.
- rsj_hn 5y ago> I feel you are hiding the adversity inherent to employee-employer relations. The only adversity inheritent to the employer/employee system is the same adversity inheritent to any buyer/seller relationship. Both want to extract the most from the other while providing the least. Sellers curse when it's a buyer's market and buyers curse when it's a seller's market, and buyers always want it to be a buyers market and vice versa. That's pretty normal and appears in every market, including the labor market. If you are buying flat screen TVs, you need to understand that the flatscreen TV makers are not your friend. They will charge as much as they possibly can. That doesn't mean you hate them, but if you feel personally wounded when they try to screw you over, then you are in for a life lesson. Be wary and avoid brand loyalties. The same with your employer. I don't think this is something I am trying to hide.
- Ericson2314 5y ago> The only adversity inheritent to the employer/employee system is the same adversity inheritent to any buyer/seller relationship. Sure, but your choice of work far dwarfs any other of those other transactions in its magnitude (and ongoing nature).
- markrages 5y agoI can't find any definition of inheritent. What do you mean by this word?