4 ms·

Why would an employer ever start a business if he had to pay every dollar of "profit" to the employees? Besides, who is to say what that productivity to the em

by crusso 14y ago

Why would an employer ever start a business if he had to pay every dollar of "profit" to the employees? Besides, who is to say what that productivity to the employer is? If I start a grocery business and hire you to work the cash register - it's pretty easy for you to see $5k/day come through the drawer and think, "I'm responsible for $5k/day." In reality, though, your contribution is minor compared to the costs of rent, paying for business licenses, paying taxes, stocking inventory, paying for inventory, paying for advertising, and managing the other employees of the business. Your "productivity" is actually what you negotiate for your salary. My productivity as the business owner is what's left after all my costs including your salary.

Nursie 14y ago
So f*ck anyone that can't negotiate well?
- crusso 14y ago
  Okay, so in your world the government should be responsible for all negotiations? Some people and some businesses (run by people) can't negotiate well - so this logically follows from your caustic and emotional comment. The government should set the price of my airline ticket, the price of milk at the grocery store, my salary, the salaries of professional basketball players, the prices that business use between each other, etc.? Let me just truly get a full view of your philosophy and what kind of zero Liberty world you would have us all live in.
  - Nursie 14y ago
    Protecting the weakest in society != zero Liberty. The world ain't black and white and I didn't say the government should be responsible for all negotiations. At the lower end, the people who are stuck on minimum wage, the people who cannot improve themselves, these people need some protection. Yes, there are humans who are not good at looking out for their own long term interests or even their short term interests, lots of them. Looking out for them, protecting them from getting into (for instance) unfair contracts is one very useful government function. One could consider very low wages to be an unfair contract, pretty much by definition.
    - crusso 14y ago
      Protecting the weakest in society != zero Liberty. So what's the cutoff for the "weakest in society"? Do you have a percentage of the population that we're obligated to care for? Should these people too helpless/clueless to ask for a competitive wage be allowed to drive cars? Should they be allowed to vote when they can't really perform the most basic of tasks in society? I didn't say the government should be responsible for all negotiations So where is the cutoff and how do we prevent it from creeping up? Food stamp use continues to rise because apparently larger and larger segments of the population cannot earn enough money for food. When does the continued increase of helplessness level off? the people who cannot improve themselves Cannot or will not? What incentive is there for people to get an education, to work hard, to improve their lot in life, to learn better ways to live, to learn how to negotiate for their worth at a job, etc. if the government tries to take over care of so many aspects. By seeking to protect people, government creates a dependency and victimhood mentality in society. Look, I'm for helping the helpless in our society. What I'm not for are absolute statements like your next one that are guaranteed to lead to an increase in helplessness. One could consider very low wages to be an unfair contract, pretty much by definition. If the wage earner is free to go elsewhere to negotiate the fee for his time then it is not unfair by definition.
      - Nursie 14y ago
        Bullshit, basically. So much ideological bullshit. Sorry.
ncallaway 14y ago
> Why would an employer ever start a business if he had to pay every dollar of "profit" to the employees? No one, ever. Maybe, on a technicality, the founders of 501(c)(3)s. I didn't use the word profit. > Besides, who is to say what that productivity to the employer is? The employer is to say the productivity of the employee. They won't do this explicitly, and it's very rarely a value that could be directly calculable. This could be a case where I'm not using the best possible term. When I say the "productivity to an employer" of an employee, I'm actually talking about the value to the employer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_(economics) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_(economics)). One way to answer the question of what the productivity of an employee is would be to ask this question: "Were there only one laborer remaining unemployed, and they were free to name their salary, what is the maximum price that I would be willing to pay someone to perform this work?" >If I start a grocery business and hire you to work the cash register - it's pretty easy for you to see $5k/day come through the drawer and think, "I'm responsible for $5k/day." See above. All of this is from the employer's perspective. It doesn't matter what the employee thinks their "worth" is; what matters is what value the employer gains from the relationship. > Your "productivity" is actually what you negotiate for your salary. My productivity as the business owner is what's left after all my costs including your salary. This actually hits at my key point. Your "productivity" is actually your VALUE. What you negotiate for your salary is your PRICE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price). I argue that these two are not necessarily coupled. Further, I suspect in the current U.S. economy at the low-income end of the job market these _are not_ coupled. EDIT: Changed the final sentence from "I argue...that I suspect" to simply "I suspect...".

by crusso 14y ago

Nursie 14y ago

So f*ck anyone that can't negotiate well?

crusso 14y ago
Okay, so in your world the government should be responsible for all negotiations? Some people and some businesses (run by people) can't negotiate well - so this logically follows from your caustic and emotional comment. The government should set the price of my airline ticket, the price of milk at the grocery store, my salary, the salaries of professional basketball players, the prices that business use between each other, etc.? Let me just truly get a full view of your philosophy and what kind of zero Liberty world you would have us all live in.
- Nursie 14y ago
  Protecting the weakest in society != zero Liberty. The world ain't black and white and I didn't say the government should be responsible for all negotiations. At the lower end, the people who are stuck on minimum wage, the people who cannot improve themselves, these people need some protection. Yes, there are humans who are not good at looking out for their own long term interests or even their short term interests, lots of them. Looking out for them, protecting them from getting into (for instance) unfair contracts is one very useful government function. One could consider very low wages to be an unfair contract, pretty much by definition.
  - crusso 14y ago
    Protecting the weakest in society != zero Liberty. So what's the cutoff for the "weakest in society"? Do you have a percentage of the population that we're obligated to care for? Should these people too helpless/clueless to ask for a competitive wage be allowed to drive cars? Should they be allowed to vote when they can't really perform the most basic of tasks in society? I didn't say the government should be responsible for all negotiations So where is the cutoff and how do we prevent it from creeping up? Food stamp use continues to rise because apparently larger and larger segments of the population cannot earn enough money for food. When does the continued increase of helplessness level off? the people who cannot improve themselves Cannot or will not? What incentive is there for people to get an education, to work hard, to improve their lot in life, to learn better ways to live, to learn how to negotiate for their worth at a job, etc. if the government tries to take over care of so many aspects. By seeking to protect people, government creates a dependency and victimhood mentality in society. Look, I'm for helping the helpless in our society. What I'm not for are absolute statements like your next one that are guaranteed to lead to an increase in helplessness. One could consider very low wages to be an unfair contract, pretty much by definition. If the wage earner is free to go elsewhere to negotiate the fee for his time then it is not unfair by definition.
    - Nursie 14y ago
      Bullshit, basically. So much ideological bullshit. Sorry.

ncallaway 14y ago

> Why would an employer ever start a business if he had to pay every dollar of "profit" to the employees? No one, ever. Maybe, on a technicality, the founders of 501(c)(3)s. I didn't use the word profit. > Besides, who is to say what that productivity to the employer is? The employer is to say the productivity of the employee. They won't do this explicitly, and it's very rarely a value that could be directly calculable. This could be a case where I'm not using the best possible term. When I say the "productivity to an employer" of an employee, I'm actually talking about the value to the employer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_(economics) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_(economics)). One way to answer the question of what the productivity of an employee is would be to ask this question: "Were there only one laborer remaining unemployed, and they were free to name their salary, what is the maximum price that I would be willing to pay someone to perform this work?" >If I start a grocery business and hire you to work the cash register - it's pretty easy for you to see $5k/day come through the drawer and think, "I'm responsible for $5k/day." See above. All of this is from the employer's perspective. It doesn't matter what the employee thinks their "worth" is; what matters is what value the employer gains from the relationship. > Your "productivity" is actually what you negotiate for your salary. My productivity as the business owner is what's left after all my costs including your salary. This actually hits at my key point. Your "productivity" is actually your VALUE. What you negotiate for your salary is your PRICE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price). I argue that these two are not necessarily coupled. Further, I suspect in the current U.S. economy at the low-income end of the job market these _are not_ coupled. EDIT: Changed the final sentence from "I argue...that I suspect" to simply "I suspect...".