4 ms·

What's crazy is that productivity per employee just keeps increasing year after year, but successive neoliberal governments continue to lower corporate taxes. T

by xzjis 10mo ago

What's crazy is that productivity per employee just keeps increasing year after year, but successive neoliberal governments continue to lower corporate taxes. They should be doing the exact opposite! Taxes should be raised as productivity increases! AI is just one more tool that gradually increases productivity, among others.

Armisael16 10mo ago
Why should productivity and corporate tax rates be correlated at all, up or down? The link there is not obvious.
- smallmancontrov 10mo ago
  Insofar as productivity is a sign of the system getting imbalanced towards capital, the system should be pushed back and the everyman thrown a bone.
  - CrazyStat 10mo ago
    To what extent is productivity a sign of the system getting imbalanced towards capital? That relationship is not at all clear to me.
    - jarpschope 10mo ago
      If productivity is increasing but not average salary, then by definition the additional wealth is being taken by the owners of capital.
      - kortilla 10mo ago
        No it’s not. If the increased productivity is realized by multiple industries, then they all compete on price and the price of their goods comes down. That means the consumers of the product capture the gains in productivity. Farmers using machinery instead of labor has meant cheaper food for everyone, not rich farmers.
        alexashka 10mo ago
        Right, because governments do anti-trust and ensure fair competition. We all agree. When your argument boils down to discussing fantasies in a fantasy world, you have a bright future as an economist indeed.
        kortilla 10mo ago
        I gave you a very concrete example that has tons of competition at every level of the stack (food supply). If you’re going to ignore it and call things a fantasy, why even bother commenting?
        jarpschope 10mo ago
        This is possible in theory. I think that if we look at inflation-adjusted productivity, and inflation-adjusted average income, then that would indeed prove increasing inequality, right? I believe the chart in this link is adjusted by inflation. Showing overall the same trend: https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/ https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/
    - smallmancontrov 10mo ago
      It has a finger on the long term trend of decreasing relevance for labor and increasing relevance for capital as factors of production, but it's certainly not a metric I'd choose and that's why I tried so hard to steer towards something better. One can imagine a world where productivity increases, the need for old jobs is reduced, but newer, better jobs more than replace them because the economy is experiencing genuine growth. Self-serving capital rhetoric will push you to always imagine it this way, self-serving labor rhetoric will push you to never imagine it this way, but good policy lies in figuring out what's actually happening in aggregate and responding accordingly (the framing I tried to push).
    - immibis 10mo ago
      It's not productivity itself; it's the decoupling of productivity from wages. If I'm creating 3 times as much value as my equivalent in 1970, why aren't I getting paid 3 times as much inflation-adjusted money, hmm? It's not even unfair to shareholders - they'd also get 3 times as much as in 1970. But instead they get 10 times as much and I get 0.7 times as much, or something like that. What's the deal?
      - CrazyStat 10mo ago
        Ok, but that’s not what the post I replied to was saying.
      - seneca 10mo ago
        > If I'm creating 3 times as much value as my equivalent in 1970, why aren't I getting paid 3 times as much inflation-adjusted money, hmm? Because that increase in productivity comes almost entirely from technology owned by your employer. To look at it in a contrived example, let's take textiles. There is a textile factory employing weavers who weave fabric by hand, and the factory owners buys a new automated weaving machine that makes the weavers each 3 times more productive. The maker of the machine created the technology, and is paid for it, the owner of the factory made the investment to bring the technology, and profits from it. This is basically exactly what has happened to modern productivity.
        com2kid 10mo ago
        Except in technology where the gains come from my personal investment in skills. I'm spending hours every week keeping up with the field of software engineering. I've been investing in learning my craft since I was 14 or so. I'd argue the same goes for many types of digital creators, artists, video editors, animators, and so forth.
        seneca 10mo ago
        > Except in technology where the gains come from my personal investment in skills. Not really. That's essentially a weaver learning to use the new automated weaving machine. That is what you do to remain qualified for the job. Now, if you were a framework or key system creator, building the underlying platforms that get adopted throughout the industry, I would agree. But just learning to use the tooling the the industry creates isn't that different, other than the rate of change you have to keep up with.
lm28469 10mo ago
> but successive neoliberal governments continue to lower corporate taxes. By itself it wouldn't be a problem, the problem is at the same time they raise taxes for people doing OK, and salaries are mostly stagnating.
- LogicFailsMe 10mo ago
  True, but good luck getting people to vote for their own interests. It's not hard to fix this. It really isn't. But it's nearly impossible to get through to people. As someone else said, at some point you have to make a choice about where you want to live and do what it takes to get to that place before you drown in the sea of marching morons.
artursapek 10mo ago
[flagged]
- 0x696C6961 10mo ago
  Then leave
  - nish__ 10mo ago
    Doesn't that make the hivemind worse? I like to listen to minority opinions, not kick them out.
    - 0x696C6961 10mo ago
      He wasn't exactly stating a nuanced opinion.
      - deleted 10mo ago
        [deleted]
      - artursapek 10mo ago
        Begging to get taxed harder doesn't warrant a nuanced response.
  - artursapek 10mo ago
    You made your account last year kiddo sit down
    - deleted 10mo ago
      [deleted]
- deleted 10mo ago
  [deleted]
kortilla 10mo ago
If productivity increases, margins increase. When margins increase any business in a competitive environment will have to lower its prices in response to any other business lowering prices that got those automation gains. Productivity increases result in lower prices in any competitive market.
- danhon 10mo ago
  * competitive

by xzjis 10mo ago

Armisael16 10mo ago

Why should productivity and corporate tax rates be correlated at all, up or down? The link there is not obvious.

smallmancontrov 10mo ago
Insofar as productivity is a sign of the system getting imbalanced towards capital, the system should be pushed back and the everyman thrown a bone.
- CrazyStat 10mo ago
  To what extent is productivity a sign of the system getting imbalanced towards capital? That relationship is not at all clear to me.
  - jarpschope 10mo ago
    If productivity is increasing but not average salary, then by definition the additional wealth is being taken by the owners of capital.
    - kortilla 10mo ago
      No it’s not. If the increased productivity is realized by multiple industries, then they all compete on price and the price of their goods comes down. That means the consumers of the product capture the gains in productivity. Farmers using machinery instead of labor has meant cheaper food for everyone, not rich farmers.
      - alexashka 10mo ago
        Right, because governments do anti-trust and ensure fair competition. We all agree. When your argument boils down to discussing fantasies in a fantasy world, you have a bright future as an economist indeed.
        kortilla 10mo ago
        I gave you a very concrete example that has tons of competition at every level of the stack (food supply). If you’re going to ignore it and call things a fantasy, why even bother commenting?
      - jarpschope 10mo ago
        This is possible in theory. I think that if we look at inflation-adjusted productivity, and inflation-adjusted average income, then that would indeed prove increasing inequality, right? I believe the chart in this link is adjusted by inflation. Showing overall the same trend: https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/ https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/
  - smallmancontrov 10mo ago
    It has a finger on the long term trend of decreasing relevance for labor and increasing relevance for capital as factors of production, but it's certainly not a metric I'd choose and that's why I tried so hard to steer towards something better. One can imagine a world where productivity increases, the need for old jobs is reduced, but newer, better jobs more than replace them because the economy is experiencing genuine growth. Self-serving capital rhetoric will push you to always imagine it this way, self-serving labor rhetoric will push you to never imagine it this way, but good policy lies in figuring out what's actually happening in aggregate and responding accordingly (the framing I tried to push).
  - immibis 10mo ago
    It's not productivity itself; it's the decoupling of productivity from wages. If I'm creating 3 times as much value as my equivalent in 1970, why aren't I getting paid 3 times as much inflation-adjusted money, hmm? It's not even unfair to shareholders - they'd also get 3 times as much as in 1970. But instead they get 10 times as much and I get 0.7 times as much, or something like that. What's the deal?
    - CrazyStat 10mo ago
      Ok, but that’s not what the post I replied to was saying.
    - seneca 10mo ago
      > If I'm creating 3 times as much value as my equivalent in 1970, why aren't I getting paid 3 times as much inflation-adjusted money, hmm? Because that increase in productivity comes almost entirely from technology owned by your employer. To look at it in a contrived example, let's take textiles. There is a textile factory employing weavers who weave fabric by hand, and the factory owners buys a new automated weaving machine that makes the weavers each 3 times more productive. The maker of the machine created the technology, and is paid for it, the owner of the factory made the investment to bring the technology, and profits from it. This is basically exactly what has happened to modern productivity.
      - com2kid 10mo ago
        Except in technology where the gains come from my personal investment in skills. I'm spending hours every week keeping up with the field of software engineering. I've been investing in learning my craft since I was 14 or so. I'd argue the same goes for many types of digital creators, artists, video editors, animators, and so forth.
        seneca 10mo ago
        > Except in technology where the gains come from my personal investment in skills. Not really. That's essentially a weaver learning to use the new automated weaving machine. That is what you do to remain qualified for the job. Now, if you were a framework or key system creator, building the underlying platforms that get adopted throughout the industry, I would agree. But just learning to use the tooling the the industry creates isn't that different, other than the rate of change you have to keep up with.

lm28469 10mo ago

> but successive neoliberal governments continue to lower corporate taxes. By itself it wouldn't be a problem, the problem is at the same time they raise taxes for people doing OK, and salaries are mostly stagnating.

LogicFailsMe 10mo ago
True, but good luck getting people to vote for their own interests. It's not hard to fix this. It really isn't. But it's nearly impossible to get through to people. As someone else said, at some point you have to make a choice about where you want to live and do what it takes to get to that place before you drown in the sea of marching morons.

artursapek 10mo ago

[flagged]

0x696C6961 10mo ago
Then leave
- nish__ 10mo ago
  Doesn't that make the hivemind worse? I like to listen to minority opinions, not kick them out.
  - 0x696C6961 10mo ago
    He wasn't exactly stating a nuanced opinion.
    - deleted 10mo ago
      [deleted]
    - artursapek 10mo ago
      Begging to get taxed harder doesn't warrant a nuanced response.
- artursapek 10mo ago
  You made your account last year kiddo sit down
  - deleted 10mo ago
    [deleted]
deleted 10mo ago
[deleted]

kortilla 10mo ago

If productivity increases, margins increase. When margins increase any business in a competitive environment will have to lower its prices in response to any other business lowering prices that got those automation gains. Productivity increases result in lower prices in any competitive market.

danhon 10mo ago
* competitive