3 ms·
Yes, for a high enough salary, someone will do the job. But it makes a huge difference whether a third party is artificially disincentivizing one of the parties
by SilasX 5y ago
Yes, for a high enough salary, someone will do the job. But it makes a huge difference whether a third party is artificially disincentivizing one of the parties to the extent that a good deal before the artificial disincentive is now woefully insufficient.
To ignore that effect and just focus on the negotiation dynamics is to miss the bigger picture (and unforced error).
- dagenix 5y agoYou're arguing that the labor market is distorted by unemployment benefits - that may very well be true. But that doesn't mean there is a "shortage" of people able to do that job.
- SilasX 5y agoYes, it means there might be a technically inaccuracy in the use of that term [1]. But the substantive point is still sound, and it would be a mistake to miss that point merely because of such a technicality. [1] But even that would be dubious. It’s actually closer to the technical economic meaning of “shortage” when artificial effects prevent exchanges that would otherwise happen.
- whoaisme 5y agoWhen the government hands out money that is artificial but when the government says it you make more money you will net less total because you benefits will be cut that is natural. It's hilarious to me how simpletons are coopted into parroting rich people propaganda and think they are so wise.