6 ms·
It's 100% lower wages for those who lost jobs.
by po1nt 1y ago
It's 100% lower wages for those who lost jobs.
- frikskit 1y agoWhy not set very low maximum wage ceilings and have 100% employment? /s
- roenxi 1y agoBecause that happens naturally without a law. People lower the wage they ask for until they get a job.
- actionfromafar 1y agoI think they were sarcastic.
- frikskit 1y agoThanks, yes, I was trying to show how the alternative is absurd
- themafia 1y agoAre you going to reduce lottery payouts and maximum stock investments as well? Will I still be allowed to hunt for food? Society is something better encouraged than gamified.
- Ray20 1y ago> Are you going to reduce lottery payouts They will decrease on their own if people think about where to get food, and not about extra money for the lottery. > and maximum stock investments as well? No, there are no restrictions. Any amount of investment. But there are only government's stocks and the terms of return on investment are determined by the government > Will I still be allowed to hunt for food? Only deep in the sparsely populated provinces. To avoid armed rebellions. > Society is something better encouraged than gamified. You'll be surprised at what methods encourage people best. Read the biography of Korolev, who sent the first satellite and the first man into space. A case was fabricated against him, he was sentenced to 10 years in a gulag, but after a year he was transferred to a prison for engineers, on the condition that he will be a very effective engineer. And he was. The results of such encouragement were amazing and almost unachievable by any other methods.
- themafia 1y ago> And he was. The results of such encouragement were amazing and almost unachievable by any other methods. Oh boy. You've missed the glaringly obvious. They only did this because they couldn't pay him. In other countries that paid their engineers they produced more and better products. History is clear and obvious on this fact. > You'll be surprised at what methods encourage people best. There's very little surprise when you study the actual science of human psychology and performance and not the journals of demented cold war generals. Anyways, thanks for being honest about wanting to create a Company Scrip Town, I and many others, of course, will never cooperate with you. You're right to fear rebellion.
- Ray20 1y ago> They only did this because they couldn't pay him. But they could. But no amount of money will encourage an engineer as much as the need to escape the gulag. Especially if you add some variety to their experience by staying in the gulag. > In other countries that paid their engineers they produced more and better products. It is precisely for this reason that the overwhelming majority of engineers in the USSR were not threatened with the gulag for inefficiency. And many believe that this is a good thing, and that "efficient" engineers threaten to destroy the labor market entirely. > History is clear and obvious on this fact. Yes. The Soviet space program created by Korolev is the pinnacle of human engineering thought, only God is above it. History is definitely clear and obvious on this fact > I and many others, of course, will never cooperate with you. That's the best part. You will vote yourself out of economic freedom, and then there will be no reason to ask about your opinion. Just look at the trends and public opinion on the necessity for economic freedom. You are already in checkmate if you look a few moves ahead.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- em500 1y agoWhy not set very high minimum wage floors and make 100% of worker rich? /s Turns out economics is actually more difficult than "higher minimum wage is good/bad".
- barchar 1y agoThis has been tried, and actually does work reasonably well. Well, not maximum wages as policy but policies where high productivity workers take a lower wage than they could individually bargain for in exchange for boosting wages of low productivity workers. It provides a windfall to the most productive industries and a squeeze to the least productive ones.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- simianwords 1y agoAlso consider non linear utility of money.
- skrebbel 1y agoFor hamburger flippers? A 25% increase in wage might well be superlinear for some of them (eg better circumstances and opportunities for kids)
- simianwords 1y agoYeah but the other people lost their jobs and 100% of wages. So you can compare net utility gain or loss.
- skrebbel 1y agoYes but that’s not the argument you made.
- simianwords 1y agoI didn’t make any argument. I was expanding on parents point.
- skrebbel 1y agoYes and I was responding solely to your expansion, which I believe is inapplicable here.
- BriggyDwiggs42 1y agoCorrect?
- ath3nd 1y agoNah, they didn't lose them, they got employed elsewhere for what they are worth, so if we do random calculations, it was probably something like 25% increase for many of them. The unemployment statistics were not influenced by raising the minimum wage here, so you can assume that the people who lost their low paid jobs simply moved elsewhere and got better paid jobs. It's mostly the employers' loss, which is how it should be. If you can't afford to start a business, don't start a business.
- StevenWaterman 1y agoIf the total salary has gone up, for less work done, it is a positive change. You can solve the inequal distribution via taxes and benefits. Start: 100 people paid $100 After minimum wage change: 90 people paid $125, 10 people paid $0 After tax increase: 90 people paid $113 + $12 taxes, 10 people paid $108 from taxes Now everyone is paid at least as much as they were before, and fewer people are forced to perform labour In practice it was only 3% unemployment not 10%, which means the tax increase is less and there is more of an incentive to continue working. You can also pay the displaced workers less than their original wage, to reach an equilibrium where everyone is happy with either work+more money, or leisure+less money. Or have it be age-based with an earlier retirement. Or have people work part-time. We need to stop seeing having a job as being inherently good. Being able to live is good. Humanity should strive for 100% unemployment.
- po1nt 1y agoThen we should increase the minimum wage to 200$/hr or more.
- StevenWaterman 1y agoThe total salary would go down if you did that
- thfuran 1y agoThen we should just increase the presidential salary to 110% of the total 2024 US workforce salary.
- sethammons 1y agoBillionaires don't care about their salary.
- thfuran 1y agoThey would if their salary were more than ten trillion dollars.
- bravesoul2 1y agoThey are working the same hours elsewhere for free?
- po1nt 1y agoThey might be living in a tent on a sidewalk for free if you ban them from working.
- bravesoul2 1y agoThey might get another job. People dont think holistically about the economy. They think there are jobs. When they go there are that fewer jobs. Immigrants come in a steal jobs. Etc. But in an economy, each richer consumer creates more jobs. The McD employees now buy better food, creating work for that supply chain. Or they can pay for education. Or they buy a takeaway coffee more often. The immigrants who come and do jobs work hard for lower pay them spend that money into the economy.
- parineum 1y agoWhy not set the minimum wage at $50? Why not set $20 for everyone? More money in employees pockets means more jobs and more disposable income, after all.
- po1nt 1y agoIf they could get higher paying job they would already do so. No legal immigrant dreams of working at McDonalds. No illegal immigrant would be employed by McDonalds.