3 ms·

The money going to shareholders isn't really coming from the workers though, it's coming from stock price appreciation. They could cut their dividends and give

The money going to shareholders isn't really coming from the workers though, it's coming from stock price appreciation. They could cut their dividends and give that to employees instead, but they don't have large dividends to begin with. I'm not making a value judgement, I'm just saying that increasing wages across the entire economy will cause increased prices unless something offsets it (e.g. increased productivity that keeps pace with wage increases... which doesn't seem likely).

wolverine876 5y ago
> The money going to shareholders isn't really coming from the workers though, it's coming from stock price appreciation. They could cut their dividends and give that to employees instead, but they don't have large dividends to begin with. Money is conserved: the profits go somewhere, even if to retained earnings that the corporation spends; some amount could be given to the workers to spend. Again, how is that more inflationary? Also, spending is inflationary only in certain conditions, such as when demand is constrained. Not all spending is inflationary.
- jeffreyrogers 5y ago
  > Money is conserved I agree with this. You should run the numbers and look at how much companies could improve workers wages by. I did this a few years ago with Walmart, I was surprised by how small the amount was. I think these companies are more constrained than you think, and the huge difference in earnings (which I'm not defending) between the executives and the average worker is more due to their scale and the fact that they can skim a bit off every worker than due to pure exploitation. E.g. Walmart has ~2m employees. $100 from each is $200m more for the executives, but it's not really going to make much a difference to an employee to get an extra $100 per year.

3 ms·

The money going to shareholders isn't really coming from the workers though, it's coming from stock price appreciation. They could cut their dividends and give

by jeffreyrogers 5y ago

wolverine876 5y ago
> The money going to shareholders isn't really coming from the workers though, it's coming from stock price appreciation. They could cut their dividends and give that to employees instead, but they don't have large dividends to begin with. Money is conserved: the profits go somewhere, even if to retained earnings that the corporation spends; some amount could be given to the workers to spend. Again, how is that more inflationary? Also, spending is inflationary only in certain conditions, such as when demand is constrained. Not all spending is inflationary.
- jeffreyrogers 5y ago
  > Money is conserved I agree with this. You should run the numbers and look at how much companies could improve workers wages by. I did this a few years ago with Walmart, I was surprised by how small the amount was. I think these companies are more constrained than you think, and the huge difference in earnings (which I'm not defending) between the executives and the average worker is more due to their scale and the fact that they can skim a bit off every worker than due to pure exploitation. E.g. Walmart has ~2m employees. $100 from each is $200m more for the executives, but it's not really going to make much a difference to an employee to get an extra $100 per year.