3 ms·

As if events like this were happening everywhere back then. Why is this outcome attributed to an unregulated market and not a group of horrible, horrible people

As if events like this were happening everywhere back then. Why is this outcome attributed to an unregulated market and not a group of horrible, horrible people? Unfortunately most people seem to think we need the government to protect us from an unregulated market of employers. But the reality is, we don't. Even during the Industrial Revolution, work-related fatalities were on the decline and the creation of OSHA had little affect on the trend [1]. It's most surprising to me that people in technology on HN make this argument. You see benefits at startups and larger companies like free meals, free transportation, remote work, free cell phones, gym memberships, on-site massages, free Kindles, health care, dental care, 401k matching, and so on. What percentage of the potential pool of benefits are mandated by the government? I would say an extremely small percentage. So what causes all of these employers to offer such amazing benefits and salaries without anybody from the government telling them to do so? Competition for labor. [1] http://mercatus.org/publication/evaluating-oshas-effectiveness-and-suggestions-reform http://mercatus.org/publication/evaluating-oshas-effectivene...

_delirium 12y ago
I don't think anyone doubts that a small slice of high-demand workers are in a favorable position to negotiate good terms. That's also why the original wave of unionization took off among occupations like coal miners and shipyard workers, not among stockbrokers or architects. Programmers don't need much government help because they, for the moment, are in high demand, so the employee has more market power than in most industries. Though even in tech, some aspects seem to still need the government to intervene: despite the shortage of programmers, employers still have enough market power to force noncompete agreements into the average worker's employment contract, unless the state bans them (as California did). One thing I like about living in Denmark, though, is that just about all employees have reasonable working conditions and decent perks, so there's less of a social gulf between different occupations. I get 6 weeks of vacation per year, along with benefits like paternity leave, good health coverage, a safe working environment, etc.— and so does everyone else. Actually I think even in my white-collar job the benefits are a little better here, though it depends on what you care about. I don't have free lunch or a masseuse available, but the work/life balance is good: at a Valley company it would be hard to negotiate perks like 6 weeks of vacation (especially if you want a real vacation, where you disconnect for at least 2-3 weeks at a time), and people don't seem to normally take paternity leave.
e40 12y ago
I think China is the perfect example of what I believe. Do you really believe the Clean Air Act was unnecessary? I was around in the 70's in California when the air was crap. Do you really think that cleanup would have happened without regulation? Not in a million years. And, don't say the labor market and clean air are different. They're both driven by profits.
georgemcbay 12y ago
"Why is this outcome attributed to an unregulated market and not a group of horrible, horrible people?" How can you separate the two things? The reason we need to regulate things in general (not just economically, but in terms of all laws, etc) is because there are a significant amount of bad apples who will act horribly (though admittedly rarely to the point of murder/massacre) for personal gain if unchecked. If we lived in a truly utopian society where people always acted in the best interest of the entire community then unregulated capitalism would work fine, but so would pure socialism. We obviously don't live in such a utopian society so both extremes fail miserably.

_delirium 12y ago

I don't think anyone doubts that a small slice of high-demand workers are in a favorable position to negotiate good terms. That's also why the original wave of unionization took off among occupations like coal miners and shipyard workers, not among stockbrokers or architects. Programmers don't need much government help because they, for the moment, are in high demand, so the employee has more market power than in most industries. Though even in tech, some aspects seem to still need the government to intervene: despite the shortage of programmers, employers still have enough market power to force noncompete agreements into the average worker's employment contract, unless the state bans them (as California did). One thing I like about living in Denmark, though, is that just about all employees have reasonable working conditions and decent perks, so there's less of a social gulf between different occupations. I get 6 weeks of vacation per year, along with benefits like paternity leave, good health coverage, a safe working environment, etc.— and so does everyone else. Actually I think even in my white-collar job the benefits are a little better here, though it depends on what you care about. I don't have free lunch or a masseuse available, but the work/life balance is good: at a Valley company it would be hard to negotiate perks like 6 weeks of vacation (especially if you want a real vacation, where you disconnect for at least 2-3 weeks at a time), and people don't seem to normally take paternity leave.

e40 12y ago

I think China is the perfect example of what I believe. Do you really believe the Clean Air Act was unnecessary? I was around in the 70's in California when the air was crap. Do you really think that cleanup would have happened without regulation? Not in a million years. And, don't say the labor market and clean air are different. They're both driven by profits.

georgemcbay 12y ago

"Why is this outcome attributed to an unregulated market and not a group of horrible, horrible people?" How can you separate the two things? The reason we need to regulate things in general (not just economically, but in terms of all laws, etc) is because there are a significant amount of bad apples who will act horribly (though admittedly rarely to the point of murder/massacre) for personal gain if unchecked. If we lived in a truly utopian society where people always acted in the best interest of the entire community then unregulated capitalism would work fine, but so would pure socialism. We obviously don't live in such a utopian society so both extremes fail miserably.