5 ms·

You’re comparing workers in two vastly different markets to workers in the same market. In the US, wages for one class of employee have exploded as wages for th

by morby 3y ago

You’re comparing workers in two vastly different markets to workers in the same market. In the US, wages for one class of employee have exploded as wages for the rest have stagnated.

endisneigh 3y ago
Irrelevant and ultimately arbitrary distinction. Is it bad for certain people to have too much money or not? Consider that Americans waste more energy and generate more greenhouse gasses that citizens in other, lower emitting countries pay for - we are all on the same planet. Ultimately these discussions devolve to people just being bitter others having more than them.
- skyyler 3y ago
  I'm actually incredibly concerned that the people that make sandwiches for me can't afford rent. I can't speak for everyone, but I"m pretty sure most people do care about those with less than them.
  - YeBanKo 3y ago
    I am incredibly concerned that people that make sandwiches for me can’t afford basic healthcare or stay home if they home a stomach flu.
  - robswc 3y ago
    Why do people take such low pay for making sandwiches? Genuine question, because doesn't that just lower wages for everyone and sorta peg the value of a sandwich maker to being $X/hr?
    - skyyler 3y ago
      Work or starve. Plenty of desperate people willing to do whatever jobs they can right now. Not a lot of time to train for more lucrative work, let alone find it.
- mjlawson 3y ago
  > Is it bad for [...] people to have too much money or not? Yes, by definition. The question is, how much is too much money? And in what context? Put another way, in a given economy, how much do the wages between the top and bottom earners need to differ in order for there to be not only a perceived inequity, but a genuine ethical imbalance?
- wddkcs 3y ago
  When wealth inequality within a society is often a contributing factor to revolution and societal collapse, it's not an irrelevant factor. Your stance is fine and logical, but most people don't feel the same. The difference between your wealth vs a poor African, vs your lack vs a rich American, is that you have the ability to collectivize and reach that rich American physically (not advocating violence, but pointing out that revolutions are violent). I agree that Americans should also keep this in mind, when we as a country deal with the global poor. We're richer, but they have numbers. Not wise for us to fly too high above them, without using that wealth to benefit them too.
  - s1artibartfast 3y ago
    I would argue that it is making wealth inequality a political issue and outrage around it is often a contributing factor for revolution. It is also worth noting that the results of those revolutions are often worse for both the rich and the poor. There's a long list of countries that have destroyed productive but unequal economies and replace them with those that are worse, and usually unequal but on a different axis. People like to talk about the French Revolution with Eat the Rich slogans, and forget that it left everyone worse off, led to dictatorship, and eventually everyone coming back around to realizing the old system wasn't so bad.
    - wddkcs 3y ago
      Wealth inequality affects the people, the polis, how could it not be political? I am not arguing for revolution, I am saying severe wealth inequality is a contributing factor to something I would rather avoid. No American should want our poor so desperate they resort to revolution. No American should want our government to unequally oppress the global poor. Revolution is a product of unequal systems, and I agree it is crushing.
- YeBanKo 3y ago
  We are all on the same planet, but we are not all under the same jurisdiction. My vote matters for healthcare in the US, but bears no direct influence on the healthcare in countries in Africa. If I believe that healthcare CEOs don’t create as much value as they are paid, then I may gravitate towards a single payer system and vote for a candidate pushing for it. This stats is relevant, if you vote based on data of how shared infrastructure is used.
- morby 3y ago
  What’s arbitrary is your choice of argument. You completely reject my point with a hand wave and make this a comparison between developed and under developed/developing nations Your point of saying the question is between if someone makes too much is obtuse and, honestly, naiive because the concern is does someone make too much in light of the environment they exist in. If the money they make in their market outpaces and outstrips those of others involved in the same market to an unreasonable extent then that is a problem. It means the market is not being fairly compensatory to those who contribute. This is seen in stagnant wage growth across sectors. This is seen in younger generations inability to purchase homes But let’s make this about how people on America make more than people in Africa as though such a reductive and myopic straw man addresses the real issue at hand here. No one here. No one. Is saying people in Africa should be poor or not earning a wage that is compensatory to wha they contribute to the world economy. Blood diamonds, cocoa, fishing, etc etc. but your pretending this isn’t a well discussed issue is neglectful of reality
  - morby 3y ago
    In fact it’s incredibly ironic considering the same people being addressed here, I.e. executives are major contributors to the exploitation of workers in the developing world. It’s the general population that has to learn about then address these issues and nothing would change if executives were left to their devices.
  - endisneigh 3y ago
    Your distinction is again meaningless. You say it’s a different market, I could say you should compare the class of worker. Are health care CEOs unusually paid compared to CEOs? (They are not). As I said ultimately your selection in criteria is arbitrary. The matter at hand here is some believe the income inequality is a problem. What ratio is acceptable to you?
    - morby 3y ago
      So now we’ve moved to comparing CEOs in different industries? Your own post compares executives to workers and workers to African workers. The post here talks about CEOs making vast additional sums while workers are getting pinched. Why are we suddenly comparing CEOs in healthcare to CEOs in other markets?
- johnnyworker 3y ago
  > Ultimately these discussions devolve to people just being bitter others have more than them. No, just like complaining abou theft doesn't betray the secret wish to be the thief, but for there to be no theft. Same for wages not matching productivity, not even inflation, while inequality keeps rising. If you can't understand that, that says solely something about you.
  - the_only_law 3y ago
    This has been the HN playbook for a while now. In order to shut down a conversation, just accuse the other side of jealousy. Particularly before Musk fell out of the general graces of the user base, it was incredibly common to see comments like this in regard to any criticism.
    - seattle_spring 3y ago
      Fits well into the category of "thought terminating cliche" [1]. Sadly I've noticed a steep increase in them being employed here and other similar sites lately, often with the intent of "winning" arguments. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought-terminating_clich%C3%A9#:~:text=A%20thought%2Dterminating%20clich%C3%A9%20(also,argument%20and%20quell%20cognitive%20dissonance https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought-terminating_clich%C3....
  - endisneigh 3y ago
    The illusion you seem to still be under is that wages have to match productivity. This is not a natural law of the universe.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - johnnyworker 3y ago
      .... okay? There is also none saying they shouldn't, you know.
- jrflowers 3y ago
  > Irrelevant and ultimately arbitrary distinction. This is a good point. America and Africa are the same because they’re both on earth. Few people have the good sense to dilute a point to absolutely meaningless terms, all of that muckety-muck about “relevance” and “the topic at hand” distracts from the truly important work: handwaving in such a way to shut down discussion at light speed
- malloci 3y ago
  That's an interesting attempt to deflect from the income disparity between those in executive positions to those that work for them. Even in tech, while the salaries of tech workers is high it's nothing compared to the execs. But let's follow the deflection. Instead of monetary disparity, lets look at energy waste disparity. It was recently shown that the top 10% wealthiest Americans contribute to 40% of the greenhouse gas emissions in the country. As you said, we are all on the same planet. just because they have managed to grab a bigger piece of the pie shouldn't mean that they get to pollute the planet more than anyone else. In both cases the mindset needs to change and those at the top maybe need to be a little less greedy overall. source: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2023/08/230817163849.htm https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2023/08/230817163849.h...
  - andsoitis 3y ago
    > That's an interesting attempt to deflect from the income disparity between those in executive positions to those that work for them. Even in tech, while the salaries of tech workers is high it's nothing compared to the execs. That's quite the arbitrary line to draw. Different roles have different labor markets. If you're a software engineer you are probably getting paid 10 times more than an EA. > It was recently shown that the top 10% wealthiest Americans contribute to 40% of the greenhouse gas emissions in the country. To be in the top 10% in America in terms of wealth, your net worth needs to be ~$850k. To be in the top 10% in America in terms of wages, your annual comp needs to be ~$175. That means probably most senior software engineers are in that bracket - https://www.levels.fyi/ https://www.levels.fyi/
- michaelmrose 3y ago
  Nonsensical argument. Equality isn't all or nothing it's better if we have less of it even if we don't have none of it. Furthermore people have obvious interests in decreasing inequality directly effecting them more than inequality between their home nation and another. Rich people having almost all the money means in practice they have almost all the power and our society consistently acts in a fashion so as to serve the interests in virtually all matters right up until something is so important that it solely makes or breaks elections. Billionaires don't just hoard all the toys they are outright poison for democracy. If you aren't a temporarily embarrassed millionaire you are yourself benefiting from inequality and value your own interests over the rest of us. It's ok if you think greed is good just admit it and don't pretend more ethical people are just jealous.
- newZWhoDis 3y ago
  >Consider that Americans waste more energy and generate more greenhouse gasses that citizens in other, lower emitting countries I have considered it, and it’s why I support ending all immigration (legal or otherwise), even enforcing reverse-migration if necessary. Every person we bring here 10/20/30x’es their lifetime carbon output. Pro-immigration leftists are some of the biggest polluters on the planet for this reason.
andsoitis 3y ago
> You’re comparing workers in two vastly different markets to workers in the same market. You're mistaking region for (labor) market. The market for different kinds of jobs is different. Otherwise everyone would be paid the same.
- morby 3y ago
  Market is a term that can be used to describe “an area or arena in which commercial dealings are conducted” You can absolutely refer to the US economic market or African market and the participants there in. If not I would love a reference to explain otherwise. Of course different kinds of labor receive varying compensation and these things depend on the level of skill and demand. This isn’t a question of whether everyone should be paid equally. It’s a question of how to resolve growing income disparities between top earners and low earners, specifically asymmetric income growth. Top earner income is rising at amazing rates while low earners are seeing meager increases. This has been ongoing for decades. There is an entire discussion on it here so I don’t think there needs to be any more elaboration.

by morby 3y ago

You’re comparing workers in two vastly different markets to workers in the same market. In the US, wages for one class of employee have exploded as wages for the rest have stagnated.

endisneigh 3y ago

Irrelevant and ultimately arbitrary distinction. Is it bad for certain people to have too much money or not? Consider that Americans waste more energy and generate more greenhouse gasses that citizens in other, lower emitting countries pay for - we are all on the same planet. Ultimately these discussions devolve to people just being bitter others having more than them.

skyyler 3y ago
I'm actually incredibly concerned that the people that make sandwiches for me can't afford rent. I can't speak for everyone, but I"m pretty sure most people do care about those with less than them.
- YeBanKo 3y ago
  I am incredibly concerned that people that make sandwiches for me can’t afford basic healthcare or stay home if they home a stomach flu.
- robswc 3y ago
  Why do people take such low pay for making sandwiches? Genuine question, because doesn't that just lower wages for everyone and sorta peg the value of a sandwich maker to being $X/hr?
  - skyyler 3y ago
    Work or starve. Plenty of desperate people willing to do whatever jobs they can right now. Not a lot of time to train for more lucrative work, let alone find it.
mjlawson 3y ago
> Is it bad for [...] people to have too much money or not? Yes, by definition. The question is, how much is too much money? And in what context? Put another way, in a given economy, how much do the wages between the top and bottom earners need to differ in order for there to be not only a perceived inequity, but a genuine ethical imbalance?
wddkcs 3y ago
When wealth inequality within a society is often a contributing factor to revolution and societal collapse, it's not an irrelevant factor. Your stance is fine and logical, but most people don't feel the same. The difference between your wealth vs a poor African, vs your lack vs a rich American, is that you have the ability to collectivize and reach that rich American physically (not advocating violence, but pointing out that revolutions are violent). I agree that Americans should also keep this in mind, when we as a country deal with the global poor. We're richer, but they have numbers. Not wise for us to fly too high above them, without using that wealth to benefit them too.
- s1artibartfast 3y ago
  I would argue that it is making wealth inequality a political issue and outrage around it is often a contributing factor for revolution. It is also worth noting that the results of those revolutions are often worse for both the rich and the poor. There's a long list of countries that have destroyed productive but unequal economies and replace them with those that are worse, and usually unequal but on a different axis. People like to talk about the French Revolution with Eat the Rich slogans, and forget that it left everyone worse off, led to dictatorship, and eventually everyone coming back around to realizing the old system wasn't so bad.
  - wddkcs 3y ago
    Wealth inequality affects the people, the polis, how could it not be political? I am not arguing for revolution, I am saying severe wealth inequality is a contributing factor to something I would rather avoid. No American should want our poor so desperate they resort to revolution. No American should want our government to unequally oppress the global poor. Revolution is a product of unequal systems, and I agree it is crushing.
YeBanKo 3y ago
We are all on the same planet, but we are not all under the same jurisdiction. My vote matters for healthcare in the US, but bears no direct influence on the healthcare in countries in Africa. If I believe that healthcare CEOs don’t create as much value as they are paid, then I may gravitate towards a single payer system and vote for a candidate pushing for it. This stats is relevant, if you vote based on data of how shared infrastructure is used.
morby 3y ago
What’s arbitrary is your choice of argument. You completely reject my point with a hand wave and make this a comparison between developed and under developed/developing nations Your point of saying the question is between if someone makes too much is obtuse and, honestly, naiive because the concern is does someone make too much in light of the environment they exist in. If the money they make in their market outpaces and outstrips those of others involved in the same market to an unreasonable extent then that is a problem. It means the market is not being fairly compensatory to those who contribute. This is seen in stagnant wage growth across sectors. This is seen in younger generations inability to purchase homes But let’s make this about how people on America make more than people in Africa as though such a reductive and myopic straw man addresses the real issue at hand here. No one here. No one. Is saying people in Africa should be poor or not earning a wage that is compensatory to wha they contribute to the world economy. Blood diamonds, cocoa, fishing, etc etc. but your pretending this isn’t a well discussed issue is neglectful of reality
- morby 3y ago
  In fact it’s incredibly ironic considering the same people being addressed here, I.e. executives are major contributors to the exploitation of workers in the developing world. It’s the general population that has to learn about then address these issues and nothing would change if executives were left to their devices.
- endisneigh 3y ago
  Your distinction is again meaningless. You say it’s a different market, I could say you should compare the class of worker. Are health care CEOs unusually paid compared to CEOs? (They are not). As I said ultimately your selection in criteria is arbitrary. The matter at hand here is some believe the income inequality is a problem. What ratio is acceptable to you?
  - morby 3y ago
    So now we’ve moved to comparing CEOs in different industries? Your own post compares executives to workers and workers to African workers. The post here talks about CEOs making vast additional sums while workers are getting pinched. Why are we suddenly comparing CEOs in healthcare to CEOs in other markets?
johnnyworker 3y ago
> Ultimately these discussions devolve to people just being bitter others have more than them. No, just like complaining abou theft doesn't betray the secret wish to be the thief, but for there to be no theft. Same for wages not matching productivity, not even inflation, while inequality keeps rising. If you can't understand that, that says solely something about you.
- the_only_law 3y ago
  This has been the HN playbook for a while now. In order to shut down a conversation, just accuse the other side of jealousy. Particularly before Musk fell out of the general graces of the user base, it was incredibly common to see comments like this in regard to any criticism.
  - seattle_spring 3y ago
    Fits well into the category of "thought terminating cliche" [1]. Sadly I've noticed a steep increase in them being employed here and other similar sites lately, often with the intent of "winning" arguments. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought-terminating_clich%C3%A9#:~:text=A%20thought%2Dterminating%20clich%C3%A9%20(also,argument%20and%20quell%20cognitive%20dissonance https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought-terminating_clich%C3....
- endisneigh 3y ago
  The illusion you seem to still be under is that wages have to match productivity. This is not a natural law of the universe.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - johnnyworker 3y ago
    .... okay? There is also none saying they shouldn't, you know.
jrflowers 3y ago
> Irrelevant and ultimately arbitrary distinction. This is a good point. America and Africa are the same because they’re both on earth. Few people have the good sense to dilute a point to absolutely meaningless terms, all of that muckety-muck about “relevance” and “the topic at hand” distracts from the truly important work: handwaving in such a way to shut down discussion at light speed
malloci 3y ago
That's an interesting attempt to deflect from the income disparity between those in executive positions to those that work for them. Even in tech, while the salaries of tech workers is high it's nothing compared to the execs. But let's follow the deflection. Instead of monetary disparity, lets look at energy waste disparity. It was recently shown that the top 10% wealthiest Americans contribute to 40% of the greenhouse gas emissions in the country. As you said, we are all on the same planet. just because they have managed to grab a bigger piece of the pie shouldn't mean that they get to pollute the planet more than anyone else. In both cases the mindset needs to change and those at the top maybe need to be a little less greedy overall. source: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2023/08/230817163849.htm https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2023/08/230817163849.h...
- andsoitis 3y ago
  > That's an interesting attempt to deflect from the income disparity between those in executive positions to those that work for them. Even in tech, while the salaries of tech workers is high it's nothing compared to the execs. That's quite the arbitrary line to draw. Different roles have different labor markets. If you're a software engineer you are probably getting paid 10 times more than an EA. > It was recently shown that the top 10% wealthiest Americans contribute to 40% of the greenhouse gas emissions in the country. To be in the top 10% in America in terms of wealth, your net worth needs to be ~$850k. To be in the top 10% in America in terms of wages, your annual comp needs to be ~$175. That means probably most senior software engineers are in that bracket - https://www.levels.fyi/ https://www.levels.fyi/
michaelmrose 3y ago
Nonsensical argument. Equality isn't all or nothing it's better if we have less of it even if we don't have none of it. Furthermore people have obvious interests in decreasing inequality directly effecting them more than inequality between their home nation and another. Rich people having almost all the money means in practice they have almost all the power and our society consistently acts in a fashion so as to serve the interests in virtually all matters right up until something is so important that it solely makes or breaks elections. Billionaires don't just hoard all the toys they are outright poison for democracy. If you aren't a temporarily embarrassed millionaire you are yourself benefiting from inequality and value your own interests over the rest of us. It's ok if you think greed is good just admit it and don't pretend more ethical people are just jealous.
newZWhoDis 3y ago
>Consider that Americans waste more energy and generate more greenhouse gasses that citizens in other, lower emitting countries I have considered it, and it’s why I support ending all immigration (legal or otherwise), even enforcing reverse-migration if necessary. Every person we bring here 10/20/30x’es their lifetime carbon output. Pro-immigration leftists are some of the biggest polluters on the planet for this reason.

andsoitis 3y ago

> You’re comparing workers in two vastly different markets to workers in the same market. You're mistaking region for (labor) market. The market for different kinds of jobs is different. Otherwise everyone would be paid the same.

morby 3y ago
Market is a term that can be used to describe “an area or arena in which commercial dealings are conducted” You can absolutely refer to the US economic market or African market and the participants there in. If not I would love a reference to explain otherwise. Of course different kinds of labor receive varying compensation and these things depend on the level of skill and demand. This isn’t a question of whether everyone should be paid equally. It’s a question of how to resolve growing income disparities between top earners and low earners, specifically asymmetric income growth. Top earner income is rising at amazing rates while low earners are seeing meager increases. This has been ongoing for decades. There is an entire discussion on it here so I don’t think there needs to be any more elaboration.