3 ms·
Bosses don't "give" employees raises? Let's not argue semantics. Using your line of reasoning it doesn't actually matter whether the rise in wages is "artific
by antoko 14y ago
Bosses don't "give" employees raises? Let's not argue semantics.
Using your line of reasoning it doesn't actually matter whether the rise in wages is "artificial" or not, your argument is simply "wage rises will not help" As a former recipient of wage rises I have anecdotal evidence that they do. :)
Economies are complex systems looking at one aspect of them in isolation and thinking you can apply a high school level understanding of supply and demand and come up with any substantive insight is frankly misguided.
Also, Henry Ford disagrees with you.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fordism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fordism
- sageikosa 14y agoThis is a shift of context: the first was in "us" (the non-boss political establishment not responsible for distributing receipts) "giving" raises. The second is "bosses" giving employees raises, now dropping the context of the reason for the wage increase; being compelled by force of law. The line of reasoning is entirely dependent on the reason for an employer giving more wages. If he needs to give raises to retain talent, it is presumably because the skills he is purchasing can demand a premium, which can be reflected in the prices of the product or service being offered. If most of the goods and services used by the people most "helped" by the commanded wage raise are themselves wage dependent, then their prices must increase or employment levels must decrease and efficiency of the remaining workers must increase to compensate. As market prices for goods and services are not that linearly dependent on one factor, this result on employers will inversely affect employers with the least price flexibility; the ones with the least margin, the ones employing the low-income workers.