|
Who What Now posted:You just agreed that wages are in no way influenced by the value of a worker's labor. Now you're saying this again. Which is it? Remember when I said if your wages exceed your marginal utility you get fired?
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 03:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 10:35 |
|
|
Nitrousoxide posted:Because they likely provide the least marginal value per hour worked If I fire my $15,000/yr janitor and hire a doctor to mop floors for $150,000/yr then the doctor will mop 10x as fast because look at his wage he's so productive
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 03:49
|
|
|
Nitrousoxide posted:Remember when I said if your wages exceed your marginal utility you get fired? Do you know what marginal utility is? Do you know how marginal utility is different from utility?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 03:51
|
|
|
Nitrousoxide posted:Remember when I said if your wages exceed your marginal utility you get fired? You don't get it. You're assuming that someone making minimum wage is an indication of the value of their labor, but you admitted that wages aren't an indication of someone's value. So you're basing this on absolutely nothing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 03:52
|
|
|
Jack of Hearts posted:Does that follow? It's not inconceivable that the purchase/upkeep on the robots would cost them e.g. $12/hour on average compared to $10/hour for humans. there's basically no conceivable scenario in which this is true. brand new automation is insanely expensive even if all the requisite software is ready to deploy. there's lot of technically trained people needed to install, update, and maintain that sort of thing. you still need people to run things because there will inevitably be problems, etc etc. also think about check out counters: those are already automated to some degree and yet every store i've ever been in still has both people running single queues as well as people running the automated ones too. fifteen an hour is not going to magically make all of the problems with automation magically become less burdensome. we're far away from robot coordinated burgers
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 03:53
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:If I fire my $15,000/yr janitor and hire a doctor to mop floors for $150,000/yr then the doctor will mop 10x as fast because look at his wage he's so productive Well the opportunity cost would make that a bad move there for the doctor. But you needn't make such a drastic example. Consider a 20k/yr janitor that is highly motivated and a self starter versus a 15k/yr which requires much more management because her or she is not very motivated. If the floor is 20k them the 15k/yr janitor will likely not find a job.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 03:56
|
|
|
Nitrousoxide posted:Well the opportunity cost would make that a bad move there for the doctor. But you needn't make such a drastic example. Consider a 20k/yr janitor that is highly motivated and a self starter versus a 15k/yr which requires much more management because her or she is not very motivated. If the floor is 20k them the 15k/yr janitor will likely not find a job. Is wage an accurate indication of how good a worker is or isn't it? Make up your drat mind.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 03:58
|
|
|
I've walked around in Denmark and hamburger places still make hamburgers and restaurants still have clean floors so it appears the value of that labor is more than the $21/hr fast food workers are paid there. Probably because the profitability of a dirty store selling raw hamburger meat to customers who have to scoop it out of a bin themselves would be pretty low but I am not a restaurateur.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 03:59
|
|
|
Nitrousoxide posted:Well the opportunity cost would make that a bad move there for the doctor. But you needn't make such a drastic example. Consider a 20k/yr janitor that is highly motivated and a self starter versus a 15k/yr which requires much more management because her or she is not very motivated. If the floor is 20k them the 15k/yr janitor will likely not find a job. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 04:01
|
|
|
Apparently all you need to list on a resume is your previous salary to show what a great worker you are. Unless you didn't make that much previously, in which case gently caress off, slacker.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 04:03
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:Is wage an accurate indication of how good a worker is or isn't it? Make up your drat mind. Different wages allow you to piece discriminate as workers are not identical widgets. Just like how you would pay less for a used guitar over a new one generally, so can more experience, how much of a self starter, etc can affect the wage employers are willing to pay. Supply and demand still provide the bulk of the reason behind the price since there are other similar, but not identical, alternatives available, so it is with workers.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 04:03
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:Apparently all you need to list on a resume is your previous salary to show what a great worker you are. Unless you didn't make that much previously, in which case gently caress off, slacker. Look man. We're making assumptions here that the employee is accurately priced. I'm not going to go into a life story for each example to justify why each worker is earning what they are.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 04:07
|
|
|
Nitrousoxide posted:Different wages allow you to piece discriminate as workers are not identical widgets. I'm confused so the workers are the reason raising the minimum wage wouldn't work because why? It seems like lovely managers are the problem and you like blaming working people. Moron
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 04:10
|
|
|
Nitrousoxide posted:Look man. We're making assumptions here that the employee is accurately priced. I'm not going to go into a life story for each example to justify why each worker is earning what they are. Assumptions are bad
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 04:10
|
|
|
Nitrousoxide posted:Look man. We're making assumptions here that the employee is accurately priced. And you've agreed that this isn't the case, so why the hell are you making that assumption?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 04:11
|
|
|
Nitrousoxide posted:Well the opportunity cost would make that a bad move there for the doctor. But you needn't make such a drastic example. Consider a 20k/yr janitor that is highly motivated and a self starter versus a 15k/yr which requires much more management because her or she is not very motivated. If the floor is 20k them the 15k/yr janitor will likely not find a job. Yes he would. I would not decide to run a dirty store, because that would cost me way more in revenue than it costs me to pay someone to clean it. That's why I hired a janitor in the first place. Nitrousoxide posted:Look man. We're making assumptions here that the employee is accurately priced. I'm not going to go into a life story for each example to justify why each worker is earning what they are. But you just said wages aren't equal to the monetary value that workers provide 
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 04:17
|
|
|
Twerkteam Pizza posted:I'm confused so the workers are the reason raising the minimum wage wouldn't work because why? It seems like lovely managers are the problem and you like blaming working people. Huh?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 04:17
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Yes he would. I would not decide to run a dirty store, because that would cost me way more in revenue than it costs me to pay someone to clean it. That's why I hired a janitor in the first place. But you will hire the better janitor over the lovely one that's priced the same. I mean why is this so hard to grasp?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 04:19
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Yes he would. I would not decide to run a dirty store, because that would cost me way more in revenue than it costs me to pay someone to clean it. That's why I hired a janitor in the first place. How do you quantify the value added by a janitor's labor anyway? I'm not saying its impossible, but it seems like it'd be a pretty complicated question.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 04:20
|
|
|
Nitrousoxide posted:But you will hire the better janitor over the lovely one that's priced the same. I mean why is this so hard to grasp? YES AND THEY'RE BOTH PRICED THE SAME DESPITE ONES LABOR HAVING MORE VALUE THAN THE OTHER!
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 04:21
|
|
|
Nitrousoxide posted:But you will hire the better janitor over the lovely one that's priced the same. I mean why is this so hard to grasp? Everyone can't hire the better janitor. An increase in demand for his services will mean he can charge a higher wage. Wages aren't equal to the amount of money an employee brings in, they are set by supply and demand. Quarkjets already provided you with a study that shows this ripple effect is real.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 04:21
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:But you just said wages aren't equal to the monetary value that workers provide I didn't say it here either. I said they're accurately priced. Not that wage=utility. Just like you would want a intertube you buy on eBay to be accurately priced. When that is accurately priced it doesn't mean price=cost to produce. It means it makes sense for the qualities of the product and the supply and demand.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 04:23
|
|
|
Nitrousoxide posted:Look man. We're making assumptions here that the employee is accurately priced. I'm not going to go into a life story for each example to justify why each worker is earning what they are. no, you are making that assumption because it lets you feel better about your dumb belief system. in the normal human world people are rarely, if ever, accurately 'priced'
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 04:23
|
|
|
paragon1 posted:How do you quantify the value added by a janitor's labor anyway? I'm not saying its impossible, but it seems like it'd be a pretty complicated question. The market... The market finds a way
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 04:24
|
|
|
Nitrousoxide posted:But you will hire the better janitor over the lovely one that's priced the same. I mean why is this so hard to grasp? Because what you make is not an indication of your quality as a worker. Why is this so hard to grasp?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 04:24
|
|
|
paragon1 posted:YES AND THEY'RE BOTH PRICED THE SAME DESPITE ONES LABOR HAVING MORE VALUE THAN THE OTHER! Because of the price floor yes. That's the problem.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 04:25
|
|
|
Nitrousoxide posted:Because of the price floor yes. That's the problem. Why is it a problem?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 04:26
|
|
|
Nitrousoxide posted:Because they likely provide the least marginal value per hour worked holy poo poo fuckin fight me you rear end in a top hat
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 04:30
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Everyone can't hire the better janitor. An increase in demand for his services will mean he can charge a higher wage. Wages aren't equal to the amount of money an employee brings in, they are set by supply and demand. Correct, an increase in the demand would increase the amount he can charge but it would so the same for the better janitor as well. The lovely janitor will never exceed the good janitor. And you never literally employ every single janitor. There are always good janitors moving jobs that you can hire over the lovely ones. 5% unemployment is considered full employment for a reason.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 04:31
|
|
|
Nitrousoxide posted:Because of the price floor yes. That's the problem. Oh, you think there shouldn't be a minimum wage Lol
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 04:31
|
|
|
Nitrousoxide posted:Well the opportunity cost would make that a bad move there for the doctor. But you needn't make such a drastic example. Consider a 20k/yr janitor that is highly motivated and a self starter versus a 15k/yr which requires much more management because her or she is not very motivated. If the floor is 20k them the 15k/yr janitor will likely not find a job. this doesn't even make sense you stupid motherfucker Nitrousoxide posted:Just like how you would pay less for a used guitar over a new one generally, so can more experience, how much of a self starter, etc can affect the wage employers are willing to pay.] no it fuckin doesn't you stupid motherfucker not for the people who would most benefit from a minimum wage increase, you stupid son of a bitch, i fuckin hate you
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 04:33
|
|
|
THIS GUY HE'S A REAL GO GETTER IM GONNA GIVE HIM TWELVE AN HOUR TO MOP THE FLOOR INSTEAD OF TEN, BECAUSE THAT'S HOW MINIMUM WAGE poo poo WORK loving WORKS
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 04:33
|
|
|
when was the last time you had to support yourself on a minimum wage job you cocksucker
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 04:34
|
|
|
Anybody with functioning limbs can mop a floor. The supply for janitors far outstrips the demand so no an exceptionally good janitor isn't going to get paid better. Somebody who slacks off too hard is going to get fired and replaced by somebody else because, once again, the supply is greater than the demand. A janitor that demands a higher wage because he's good at his job is going to get replaced by somebody lazier and cheaper simply because it's more cost-effective. Incidentally this is why people working multiple part time jobs is so rampant among the poor; they don't get offered much else because the companies doing the hiring know that they just plain don't have to offer more. This is the fundamental problem with your arguments; people like doctors and programmers make good money by default simply because the demand is greater than the supply. I saw crap like this happen all the time when I worked unskilled, labory jobs. Promotions were few and far between and there was just plain no incentive to work hard as you'd get paid the same either way. Yeah you could bust your hump and do twice the work as everybody else but that might get you $1/hour at best. It also might get your hours cut as you can do more in less time so hop to it, pleb; you got that done in 6 hours yesterday why is it taking you 9 today? I should fire your dumb rear end. You're lucky to have a job at all. You can be replaced, you know. Generally speaking working harder just plain doesn't lead to higher wages. ToxicSlurpee fucked around with this message at 04:37 on Aug 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 04:34
|
|
|
i want to tear off your head and poo poo into the empty space where your brain would go
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 04:35
|
|
|
Twerkteam Pizza posted:Oh, you think there shouldn't be a minimum wage I actually have not said that. I've said you need to consider the costs and benefits of the raise in the floor. I'm trying to make the case that there are costs to raising the minimum wage and everyone is fighting me tooth and nail. We haven't even gotten to whether the upsides overcome them and make it still worthwhile.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 04:36
|
|
|
Nitrousoxide posted:I actually have not said that. I've said you need to consider the costs and benefits of the raise in the floor. yeah you're right we should just have people toiling away so that they can live in poverty, you stupid fuckin rear end in a top hat your "actually a BGII" bullshit isn't fooling anyone, because there is no loving way a BGI will exist in america within any of our lifetimes. its basically the equivalent of going well if we all had a fuckin jetpack and a unicorn
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 04:36
|
|
|
Literally The Worst posted:when was the last time you had to support yourself on a minimum wage job you cocksucker About three years ago delivering pizzas.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 04:37
|
|
|
Nitrousoxide posted:Correct, an increase in the demand would increase the amount he can charge but it would so the same for the better janitor as well. The lovely janitor will never exceed the good janitor. Wages are not tied to how good an employee you are. You have been told this, you agreed to this, and yet you keep saying really dumb poo poo like this. I don't get it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 04:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 10:35 |
|
|
Nitrousoxide posted:I actually have not said that. I've said you need to consider the costs and benefits of the raise in the floor. Okay, let's do downsides: The poors aren't punished as much for being poor I can't fly my private jet as often
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 04:38
|
|