2 ms·
> If you truly believed that the 8th person would find a better job then it wouldn't matter if you fire them or not. In fact, if you create a new full time job
by SJC_Hacker 5y ago
> If you truly believed that the 8th person would find a better job then it wouldn't matter if you fire them or not. In fact, if you create a new full time job that needs 40 hours of work, then all 8 restaurant employees would apply at your company because they know they get to work 5 hours more. The best out of 8 would be chosen for the new job. One person leaves the restaurant, resulting in full employment of the 7 restaurant workers.
The "8th person" is the person who made the pasta making machine.
Whats happened is you've lowered the cost of production of pasta. The owner can now try to increase profits by either keeping the price the same and taking the savings, or lower the price to increase sales, in which case consumers see the benefit, which most economic theories predict they should through a competitive market if the owner does have some monopoly on pasta making machines.
From the saved money that the owner and/or customers, they will (hopefully) spend it on other things. Like maybe remodeling the restaurant or their home. Which means jobs are generated for restaurant and home remodelers.
Yes for the laid off restaurant worker who only knows how to make pasta by hand and cannot easily transition into a job remodeling houses, this is a problem. But on the other hand you have two wins here - the company/person that made the pasta making machine, and the person who in the end receives money that otherwise would have been spent on laboriously making pasta by hand.