4 ms·
Glad to learn from your post that the labor market has recently become perfectly competitive and efficient.
by CPLX 1y ago
Glad to learn from your post that the labor market has recently become perfectly competitive and efficient.
- philipallstar 1y ago> Glad to learn from your post that the labor market has recently become perfectly competitive and efficient. Underpaid just isn't a useful term. If it's their best option for a job in the whole world then their employer is the best it could possibly be. Describing that situation as "underpaid" is just manipulative.
- crazygringo 1y agoI mean, it's competitive and efficient enough? It doesn't need to be perfect for it to be good enough. People change jobs all the time. Yes, it involves some time, effort, and tradeoffs. But the worse your current job is, the higher the benefits of switching are.
- CPLX 1y agoGoogle is an illegal monopoly, that’s the post trial judgement of multiple courts. It has used its monopoly powers to extract vast wealth from various sectors of the economy, and it has also been sanctioned for illegally manipulating labor markets. So there’s just no reason at all to hand wave any transactions they are involved in as the result of simple supply and demand.
- crazygringo 1y agoGoogle has been found to exert various monopoly behavior in certain markets like ads search. It's not a monopoly overall, like in cloud computing or office applications. And it's very much not a monopoly in hiring for these types of lower-level jobs. Not to mention these are all seemingly through contractors anyways, of which there are many, and they provide these types of services for multiple companies. So I honestly don't know what you're talking about.
- CPLX 1y agoI am talking about the widespread fiction that markets are efficient and rational, despite overwhelming evidence that they are in fact rigged in favor of participants with market power.
- crazygringo 1y agoGoogle doesn't have market power in the market of this particular set of jobs. Many companies are competing for people with these skills, including for the exact same type of work, and there's zero evidence of any kind of collusion going on. You're going to have to be specific about what rigging you think is happening. This isn't anything like when Apple, Google, Adobe, etc. were colluding not to poach each other's engineers in 2005-2009 [1]. Job markets like aren't perfect-perfect, but they're mostly decently efficient and rational, as far as supply and demand and pricing goes, with just everyday normal friction. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Tech_Employee_Antitrust_Litigation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Tech_Employee_Antitrust_L...
- CPLX 1y agoMy argument is the burden of proof goes the other way at this point.
- crazygringo 1y agoGood luck trying to convince anyone, then. That's an extreme ideological position, not a reasonable evidence-based one.
- CPLX 1y agoThe ideological approach is to hand wave and cite market fundamentalism when confronted with a real world allegation. The evidence based approach is to look at the credibility and history of the accused party.
- 1y ago