2 ms·

Or, employment taxes should be lower. This is really a very complex problem and equation. There is also the question of "worker exploitation" in the sense of "

by brk 4y ago

Or, employment taxes should be lower. This is really a very complex problem and equation. There is also the question of "worker exploitation" in the sense of "is it reasonable to assume a McDonalds cashier should earn enough to support a family?". In some, maybe even many, cases workers are likely underpaid. However, in many other cases, workers are paid relative to their overall value, but those same workers want to have a standard of living that is simply not practical with the job they hold.

barrenko 4y ago
This is not like a retort but more an addendum - Just like healthcare, 20$ flights and shitty food, EVERYONE around that individual or item is paying for the rest of the actual value (or the environment, aka our offspring).
trelane 4y ago
> employment taxes should be lower. I am unconvinced that this is the reason that businesses don't pay workers more. Workers are usually paid according to their _replacement_ cost not the value they bring generally. In an ideal equilibrium, where the worker can push back against the employer equally, sure. However, that's seldom the case. Businesses also push back harder by hiring _definitely_ exploited workers, e.g. in agriculture and meat packing, or by hiring contractors.
- brk 4y ago
  To be clear, I am not saying it is the reason for sure, just that there are a lot more factors to this than the direct wage. Part of "lower wage taxes" would roll down to "less government support", which would theoretically roll down to "more people seeking gainful employment", which would affect the supply/demand curve of the labor pool, etc.
  - coldpie 4y ago
    > theoretically I mean, we've run these experiments. There's no need for "theoretically." You can compare outcomes in countries with more and fewer social programs. Spend a couple hours comparing healthcare outcomes, poverty rates, unhoused rates, etc across various first-world nations, compare that to tax rates and social program availability, and see if you can come to any conclusions.
    - brk 4y ago
      I am not sure it is so easy to make direct comparisons to other countries. What country that has a similar population, economy, etc. are you referring to where increased social programs result in a net-better environment? Even more locally, is there an example of a state within the US where there are indicators of success in this regard? I will say I have not studied this deeply, but I've also given it much more than just casual thought, so I am genuinely curious to know what your sample examples of successful countries are.
- raxxorraxor 4y ago
  With high employment taxes and benefits an employee cannot pay for the work of another. That causes huge problems in industries like care or medicine where prices will explode. An interesting economic metric isn't just the level of prices, it is how many hours you have to work to get an hour of work from someone else for yourself. Part of positive inflation metrics is that it was reinforced by cheaper electronics. But what about anything where human labor is involved that isn't outsourced to low wage countries?

by brk 4y ago

barrenko 4y ago

This is not like a retort but more an addendum - Just like healthcare, 20$ flights and shitty food, EVERYONE around that individual or item is paying for the rest of the actual value (or the environment, aka our offspring).

trelane 4y ago

> employment taxes should be lower. I am unconvinced that this is the reason that businesses don't pay workers more. Workers are usually paid according to their _replacement_ cost not the value they bring generally. In an ideal equilibrium, where the worker can push back against the employer equally, sure. However, that's seldom the case. Businesses also push back harder by hiring _definitely_ exploited workers, e.g. in agriculture and meat packing, or by hiring contractors.

brk 4y ago
To be clear, I am not saying it is the reason for sure, just that there are a lot more factors to this than the direct wage. Part of "lower wage taxes" would roll down to "less government support", which would theoretically roll down to "more people seeking gainful employment", which would affect the supply/demand curve of the labor pool, etc.
- coldpie 4y ago
  > theoretically I mean, we've run these experiments. There's no need for "theoretically." You can compare outcomes in countries with more and fewer social programs. Spend a couple hours comparing healthcare outcomes, poverty rates, unhoused rates, etc across various first-world nations, compare that to tax rates and social program availability, and see if you can come to any conclusions.
  - brk 4y ago
    I am not sure it is so easy to make direct comparisons to other countries. What country that has a similar population, economy, etc. are you referring to where increased social programs result in a net-better environment? Even more locally, is there an example of a state within the US where there are indicators of success in this regard? I will say I have not studied this deeply, but I've also given it much more than just casual thought, so I am genuinely curious to know what your sample examples of successful countries are.
raxxorraxor 4y ago
With high employment taxes and benefits an employee cannot pay for the work of another. That causes huge problems in industries like care or medicine where prices will explode. An interesting economic metric isn't just the level of prices, it is how many hours you have to work to get an hour of work from someone else for yourself. Part of positive inflation metrics is that it was reinforced by cheaper electronics. But what about anything where human labor is involved that isn't outsourced to low wage countries?