3 ms·

You're citing that looking at earnings from different fields as the place the "market" doesn't belong. If the market has no place in labor compensation, the wh

• wolverine876 5y ago
  > You're citing that looking at earnings from different fields as the place the "market" doesn't belong. If the market has no place in labor compensation, the where does the market belong? I'm not sure what you are interpreting from my post, or what your first sentence means, but I will try to answer: The 'market', such as it is, determines earnings. It is deeply flawed but please don't take that to a logical extreme, that the market has "no place". For very many things, I think markets are the best solution; they are also 'free', as in freedom - not constraining individual's rights to act as they wish. I am not an economist. My guess is that reducing distortions in the market mechanism might do wonders, particularly the distortion of imbalanced market power. For example, a single large employer has much greater power than a single employee, and thus has great leverage over them that doesn't yield economic outcomes. Also, some things are not well served by market pricing. For example, the market serves those most motivated to pay, which is good, but also those most able to pay. Health care and education should not be distributed based on ability to pay. Another example is that the market serves work that is directly profitable. Some things don't generate profit or not quickly enough, such as basic scientific research.