3 ms·

Perhaps if we taxed the billionaires more we could subsidize increased wages for small business owners or even do something actually good like provide universal

Perhaps if we taxed the billionaires more we could subsidize increased wages for small business owners or even do something actually good like provide universal basic income so that they cannot be so easily exploited for wildly undervalued labor

WalterBright 1y ago
The value of labor is what people are willing to pay for it.
- anigbrowl 1y ago
  Deliberately underpaying people and then telling them their work has low value is one of the most disgusting aspects of capitalists. There's lots of CEOs who are not especially productive, they just have leverage.
  - WalterBright 1y ago
    The government tries hard to repeal the Law of Supply and Demand, but so far has failed 100% of the time. The government can implement wage and price controls, but those still do not set the actual value. For example, in the USSR, the price of bread was fixed by the state. But the real price of bread was how long you were willing to wait in line for it. BTW, in the US, you are free to set up a company and then pay your workers whatever you want to. Workers can choose to work for you, or not.
    - tpxl 1y ago
      > but so far has failed 100% of the time Labor rights have been a raging success. 40 hour work weeks, minimum wage, sick leave, vacation leave (in non-shithole countries). >BTW, in the US, you are free to set up a company and then pay your workers whatever you want to. What happens when competition with deeper pockets price dumps you into oblivion? Free market is a free market only when there is competition based on the product, not how rich your investors are. There is evidence the workers are being exploited everywhere if you bother to spend a second looking. Like the parent said, your apologism of capitalists is disgusting.
      - ekianjo 1y ago
        > Labor rights have been a raging success so much success that now you need two working adults to support a family of 4 while 60 years ago a working man could support a much larger family with a single income.
      - nickpp 1y ago
        > What happens when competition with deeper pockets price dumps you into oblivion? Funny you should ask. There was a famous case from the beginning of the last century where German bromide producers price-dumped it the U.S. in an effort to undermine Dow's efforts in the same direction. The result? They failed miserably. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dow_Chemical_Company https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dow_Chemical_Company > your apologism of capitalists is disgusting Free market capitalism is the only system proven to work, over and over again. It brought billions out of poverty and it still does to this very day, when allowed to work, of course. If you find that disgusting - I am guessing you are a big fan of poverty. I would prefer a world in which everyone is rather rich (or at least well off), a world that no system other than capitalism is even close to providing.
        9rx 1y ago
        > Free market capitalism is the only system proven to work, over and over again. How come nobody practices it, then? In fact, right now the world's biggest economy is doubling down on trade restrictions.
        Ray20 1y ago
        > How come nobody practices it, then? Under capitalism, the rich are forbidden to rob the poor. Most elites are very unhappy with such ban.
        nickpp 1y ago
        It's not an on/off switch, of course, but rather a sliding scale. The free-er your markets are, the better the results. Till recently, USA was in top with both, in sharp contrast to, say, the EU who pro-regulation and anti-business. But the tariffs are an interesting experiment, with some non-economical geopolitical goals thrown in, so we'll see how it goes.
    - ben_w 1y ago
      Governments are on both sides of supply and demand: their powers to tax and spend mean they can put their metaphorical foot on the metaphorical scales to tip the balances whichever way they want, to a large degree, with rapid effect. Central planning is only one of many ways to do this, it can also be managed more locally; and Soviet-style central planning is only one many ways to do central planning, most large businesses even in capitalist nations are also somewhat-centrally planned by the C-suite.
      - WalterBright 1y ago
        Corporations do do central planning, but they do so at the high risk of becoming unmanageable and then they fall, and a competitor replaces them. Government central planning just raises taxes to cover the inefficiencies, until eventually the economy collapses.
        ben_w 1y ago
        That's a similarity, not a difference. Even regarding the scale of the organisation, there is lots of overlap between governments — at all levels, from countries, through states, to incorporated municipal governments — and businesses. You could reasonably compare Foxconn to Iceland or Wyoming (I would also list a US city, but https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_GDP https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_GDP gives me a lot of US Metropolitan Statistical Areas rather than cities, that seems like it would extend beyond the bit with the tax collection rules?) Even governments get bailouts and/or bankruptcies, both from above (e.g. https://www.uscourts.gov/data-news/judiciary-news/2012/07/13/what-happens-when-cities-go-bankrupt https://www.uscourts.gov/data-news/judiciary-news/2012/07/13...), and from outside (e.g. Greece). And corporations, when big enough, become monopolies, and raise prices to cover inefficiencies, until something breaks.
- actionfromafar 1y ago
  ... what people are willing to pay for it... when the corporations already achieved regulatory capture and can force a partly state subsidized work force to take shit underpaid jobs. It's like a handout to corporations.

WalterBright 1y ago

The value of labor is what people are willing to pay for it.

anigbrowl 1y ago
Deliberately underpaying people and then telling them their work has low value is one of the most disgusting aspects of capitalists. There's lots of CEOs who are not especially productive, they just have leverage.
- WalterBright 1y ago
  The government tries hard to repeal the Law of Supply and Demand, but so far has failed 100% of the time. The government can implement wage and price controls, but those still do not set the actual value. For example, in the USSR, the price of bread was fixed by the state. But the real price of bread was how long you were willing to wait in line for it. BTW, in the US, you are free to set up a company and then pay your workers whatever you want to. Workers can choose to work for you, or not.
  - tpxl 1y ago
    > but so far has failed 100% of the time Labor rights have been a raging success. 40 hour work weeks, minimum wage, sick leave, vacation leave (in non-shithole countries). >BTW, in the US, you are free to set up a company and then pay your workers whatever you want to. What happens when competition with deeper pockets price dumps you into oblivion? Free market is a free market only when there is competition based on the product, not how rich your investors are. There is evidence the workers are being exploited everywhere if you bother to spend a second looking. Like the parent said, your apologism of capitalists is disgusting.
    - ekianjo 1y ago
      > Labor rights have been a raging success so much success that now you need two working adults to support a family of 4 while 60 years ago a working man could support a much larger family with a single income.
    - nickpp 1y ago
      > What happens when competition with deeper pockets price dumps you into oblivion? Funny you should ask. There was a famous case from the beginning of the last century where German bromide producers price-dumped it the U.S. in an effort to undermine Dow's efforts in the same direction. The result? They failed miserably. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dow_Chemical_Company https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dow_Chemical_Company > your apologism of capitalists is disgusting Free market capitalism is the only system proven to work, over and over again. It brought billions out of poverty and it still does to this very day, when allowed to work, of course. If you find that disgusting - I am guessing you are a big fan of poverty. I would prefer a world in which everyone is rather rich (or at least well off), a world that no system other than capitalism is even close to providing.
      - 9rx 1y ago
        > Free market capitalism is the only system proven to work, over and over again. How come nobody practices it, then? In fact, right now the world's biggest economy is doubling down on trade restrictions.
        Ray20 1y ago
        > How come nobody practices it, then? Under capitalism, the rich are forbidden to rob the poor. Most elites are very unhappy with such ban.
        nickpp 1y ago
        It's not an on/off switch, of course, but rather a sliding scale. The free-er your markets are, the better the results. Till recently, USA was in top with both, in sharp contrast to, say, the EU who pro-regulation and anti-business. But the tariffs are an interesting experiment, with some non-economical geopolitical goals thrown in, so we'll see how it goes.
  - ben_w 1y ago
    Governments are on both sides of supply and demand: their powers to tax and spend mean they can put their metaphorical foot on the metaphorical scales to tip the balances whichever way they want, to a large degree, with rapid effect. Central planning is only one of many ways to do this, it can also be managed more locally; and Soviet-style central planning is only one many ways to do central planning, most large businesses even in capitalist nations are also somewhat-centrally planned by the C-suite.
    - WalterBright 1y ago
      Corporations do do central planning, but they do so at the high risk of becoming unmanageable and then they fall, and a competitor replaces them. Government central planning just raises taxes to cover the inefficiencies, until eventually the economy collapses.
      - ben_w 1y ago
        That's a similarity, not a difference. Even regarding the scale of the organisation, there is lots of overlap between governments — at all levels, from countries, through states, to incorporated municipal governments — and businesses. You could reasonably compare Foxconn to Iceland or Wyoming (I would also list a US city, but https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_GDP https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_GDP gives me a lot of US Metropolitan Statistical Areas rather than cities, that seems like it would extend beyond the bit with the tax collection rules?) Even governments get bailouts and/or bankruptcies, both from above (e.g. https://www.uscourts.gov/data-news/judiciary-news/2012/07/13/what-happens-when-cities-go-bankrupt https://www.uscourts.gov/data-news/judiciary-news/2012/07/13...), and from outside (e.g. Greece). And corporations, when big enough, become monopolies, and raise prices to cover inefficiencies, until something breaks.
actionfromafar 1y ago
... what people are willing to pay for it... when the corporations already achieved regulatory capture and can force a partly state subsidized work force to take shit underpaid jobs. It's like a handout to corporations.