3 ms·

"Market" is just another way of saying "Power differential." Most corporate cultures are inherently authoritarian, with money being used as a proxy for power.

"Market" is just another way of saying "Power differential." Most corporate cultures are inherently authoritarian, with money being used as a proxy for power. Empirically there is plenty of evidence that given a choice, many businesses would rather maintain the power differential and complain about "lack of applicants" than increase pay and suffer a corresponding diminution of authority. Stock is an even more specific proxy for power, which is why stock options that have real value are usually reserved for those at the top of the hierarchy. This is also why remote working is unpalatable. Even if it increases productivity it also enhances worker autonomy and reduces the power differential. That's not acceptable in an authoritarian culture. Attitudes to remote work can be a useful indicator of how central hierarchy is in the culture.

eru 4y ago
> Empirically there is plenty of evidence that given a choice, many businesses would rather maintain the power differential and complain about "lack of applicants" than increase pay and suffer a corresponding diminution of authority. Why does any company every pay more than the legally required minimum, then?
- bryanrasmussen 4y ago
  if you have 0 employees and nobody will work for you until you raise your pay to three times the legally required minimum, you raise because otherwise there is no power differential. If you have 10 employees and you want to hire 3 more but to do that you have to increase their pay by 25% in relation to others then you might decide not to because this decreases power for everyone (should they find out what you're paying these others)
prewett 4y ago
> "Market" is just another way of saying "Power differential." Oh come on. This is a cynical or Marxist take, but it's pretty obviously untrue. A flea market, farmers market, FB marketplace doesn't have a substantial power imbalance. A market may have a power imbalance, but it is not required. People can exchange goods/services at equal power, and routinely do so. And if I understand economics correctly, that's the purpose of a "free" market: no artificial power imbalances.
- mcv 4y ago
  This is an important point: according to Adam Smith, a free market is a market without power imbalances, a market on which everybody can trade as equals, with transparency. He was fully aware that companies would try to dominate the market, make it less free, form cartels, and generally conspire against the interests of consumers, workers and other smaller players on the market. He even suggested that workers may have to get organised in order to counter the power imbalance posed by corporations. It's only later laissez-faire and neoliberal capitalists that turned "free market" synonymous with a lack of regulation and a playground for the biggest and most powerful companies.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

eru 4y ago

> Empirically there is plenty of evidence that given a choice, many businesses would rather maintain the power differential and complain about "lack of applicants" than increase pay and suffer a corresponding diminution of authority. Why does any company every pay more than the legally required minimum, then?

bryanrasmussen 4y ago
if you have 0 employees and nobody will work for you until you raise your pay to three times the legally required minimum, you raise because otherwise there is no power differential. If you have 10 employees and you want to hire 3 more but to do that you have to increase their pay by 25% in relation to others then you might decide not to because this decreases power for everyone (should they find out what you're paying these others)

prewett 4y ago

> "Market" is just another way of saying "Power differential." Oh come on. This is a cynical or Marxist take, but it's pretty obviously untrue. A flea market, farmers market, FB marketplace doesn't have a substantial power imbalance. A market may have a power imbalance, but it is not required. People can exchange goods/services at equal power, and routinely do so. And if I understand economics correctly, that's the purpose of a "free" market: no artificial power imbalances.

mcv 4y ago
This is an important point: according to Adam Smith, a free market is a market without power imbalances, a market on which everybody can trade as equals, with transparency. He was fully aware that companies would try to dominate the market, make it less free, form cartels, and generally conspire against the interests of consumers, workers and other smaller players on the market. He even suggested that workers may have to get organised in order to counter the power imbalance posed by corporations. It's only later laissez-faire and neoliberal capitalists that turned "free market" synonymous with a lack of regulation and a playground for the biggest and most powerful companies.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]