Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Low unemployment isn’t worth much if the jobs barely pay

brookings.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

561–570 of 685 posts

Re: Low unemployment isn’t worth much if the jobs barely pay

#561

Post by 2muchcoffeeman »

carlmr wrote: post #482
hacknat wrote: post #465

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also it is a total lie and a very narrow definition of utility. Arguably, we’ve actually under priced some of the most important labor in our society (caregivers, teachers, social workers, etc), and over priced some of the dumbest (sorry, but if Uber disappeared tomorrow, society would be moderately inconvenienced, but little else). Finally, nothing in evolutionary biology teaches us that human beings ought to work.…

>if Uber disappeared tomorrow, society would be moderately inconvenienced, but little else If you inconvenience 100 million people by costing them 15 minutes more a day, or a few dollars more for lack of competition, then the cost per person may be low, but the cost altogether will be high. This is the essential problem I see with the articles, they say so many jobs are useless, but often they're useful but only a sm…

I think a problem with this line of reasoning is that people forget what we used to do before we had certain conveniences. If Uber disappears, people would just read a book for 15mins or plan everything to take the extra time into account.

Another problem with this line of reasoning is that people assume that they can always utilise 15m in a productive way or that not doing anything is not productive. How many times do you need a break everyday? How many times would a 15m break to relax and refocus or meditate actually benefit you rather than trying to force some work?

Re: Low unemployment isn’t worth much if the jobs barely pay

#562

Post by clarry »

7thaccount wrote: post #531
hacknat wrote: post #491

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you think work in and of itself is important? Being useful to your community is absolutely important, but our definition of that utility is absurdly narrow in this market economy. In fact, sometimes what we value and what is useful are totally orthogonal (again teachers are probably undervalued way too much, because we are poor long term thinkers).

Because nearly everyone wants to feel they're contributing to society in some way. I think we agree here. I'm not saying you need a horrendous office job.

I think people care less about contributing to society and more about having something meaningful to do.

Many jobs are quite meaningless, and the only reason people work them is because they have bills to pay.

On the other hand, creative people will find something meaningful to do that may or may not ever be a contribution to society.

Re: Low unemployment isn’t worth much if the jobs barely pay

#563

Post by jariel »

Low wages for basic labour are I think the biggest driver of inequality in the US. It's not taxes, or education or anything else.

Break your back, barely make it - that's not the American dream.

A lift in Minimum wage would make a big difference, the rest of us would have to pay for it in higher prices, we can afford it though.

Get medical coverage to the remaining few that don't have it and the US would make great gains.

Re: Low unemployment isn’t worth much if the jobs barely pay

#564

Post by tzs »

m0zg wrote: post #488
jswizzy wrote: post #327

Pay is going up despite all these ignorant commenters https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/03/upshot/minimum-wage-boost...

They aren't "ignorant". They just can't admit Donald Trump did something positive. So they engage in logical contortionism like "tax cuts didn't help the middle class" (they did), "low-earner wages aren't growing" (they are), "he will start WW3" (he won't - he's the least militarist president since Jimmy Carter), "low unemployment doesn't matter" (it does - how else do you expect to create upward pressure on wages?),…

Most of the low earner wage growth is due to increases in state and local minimum wage.

Re: Low unemployment isn’t worth much if the jobs barely pay

#565

Post by FireBeyond »

quotemstr wrote: post #548
hacknat wrote: post #465

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also it is a total lie and a very narrow definition of utility. Arguably, we’ve actually under priced some of the most important labor in our society (caregivers, teachers, social workers, etc), and over priced some of the dumbest (sorry, but if Uber disappeared tomorrow, society would be moderately inconvenienced, but little else). Finally, nothing in evolutionary biology teaches us that human beings ought to work.…

Why do you think caregivers, teachers, and social workers are undervalued? Last time I checked, care facilities, classrooms, and social centers were fully staffed. On what basis can you claim that their pay is too low? Who gets to decide the right salary? You? Why? A particular job being important in aggregate does not entitle each individual who does that job to a salary higher than people who do some other job that…

Why do you get to say that working a "full time" job should not have to cover your full time living expenses?

Re: Low unemployment isn’t worth much if the jobs barely pay

#566

Post by quotemstr »

FireBeyond wrote: post #565
quotemstr wrote: post #548

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you think caregivers, teachers, and social workers are undervalued? Last time I checked, care facilities, classrooms, and social centers were fully staffed. On what basis can you claim that their pay is too low? Who gets to decide the right salary? You? Why? A particular job being important in aggregate does not entitle each individual who does that job to a salary higher than people who do some other job that…

Why do you get to say that working a "full time" job should not have to cover your full time living expenses?

Why are people entitled to a particular set of benefits in exchange for a particular time spent doing some activity? Who gets to decide what benefits should result from that amount of time? You? Why?

Re: Low unemployment isn’t worth much if the jobs barely pay

#567

Post by webdva »

jlawson wrote: post #459
ernst_klim wrote: post #385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Further advancements in AI and automations will make more and more jobs obsolete. In 1000BC men and women did flour of wheat manually. They do no more, these jobs are obsolete. In 1000AD men and women did butter of milk manually. They do no more, these jobs are obsolete. In 1500AD men and women did threads of fur manually. They do no more, these jobs are obsolete. In 1940s women did manual calculations and typing f…

The problem is that the old jobs didn't require high IQ but the new jobs increasingly do. In the old days even the dumbest man could carry grain from one place to another or push a plow. Even the dumbest woman could churn butter or milk a cow when told to. These low-IQ individuals do not have the mental capacity to switch to Python programming - regardless of education. So the "IQ floor" of the economy is rising. The…

> Leftists can't conceptualize this problem [of perpetual rising unemployment due to technology] because of their egalitarian worldview, and rightists either talk about bootstraps or might not even care, seeing it as a sort of justified Darwinism.

This. So much this. And it would take a Julius Cesar for everyone to see the truth… With physical force. But this hypothetical ruler that saves the day would be an unseen actor, its ideology nonexistent as it corresponds directly with truth as it functions; in contrast to any flawed human character that reasons from humanity, that is, from emotion, prejudice, and mistaken bias. Not seeking glory and fame but instead, letting go of lustful passions, giving what must be given and withholding what must be stored or withheld—achieving balance with the Force. So this implies that the brave Darth Vader/Anakin Skywalker was actually Julius Cesar.

Re: Low unemployment isn’t worth much if the jobs barely pay

#568

Post by Double_Cast »

hacknat wrote: post #536
Double_Cast wrote: post #527

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wages vary according to marginal utility rather than total utility. The question is not "what if all teachers disappeared", but "what if one particular teacher disappeared".

Wages for public sector workers are legally defined and, at least, in this case, have very little to do with any measure of utility. Our society is horrendous at measuring utility in almost all long term cases.

I'm not complaining that teacher salaries are too high or too low. I'm complaining that: A) you're reinventing the Paradox of Value; and B) you're challenging the norm without proposing an alternative economic model.

"Just pay teachers according to the intrinsic value of their profession." But it's not immediately obvious what this means in practice. Suppose wages were set not by congress and not by the market. According to your moral calculus, what is the correct wage and how is it determined?

Re: Low unemployment isn’t worth much if the jobs barely pay

#569

Post by dublidu »

rayiner wrote: post #76

> Market failures abound: Education and health care are out of reach for many, child care is often prohibitively expensive (even as child care workers are woefully underpaid), and decent, affordable housing is scarce in many regions. It’s utterly ridiculous to call these things “market failures.” Every single one of those areas is not a market but is heavily regulated in a way that limits supply. Education mostly a g…

What does education, healthcare, childcare, and housing have in common? They didn't get cheaper from outsourcing and automation.

Re: Low unemployment isn’t worth much if the jobs barely pay

#570

Post by thereisnospork »

2muchcoffeeman wrote: post #561
carlmr wrote: post #482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>if Uber disappeared tomorrow, society would be moderately inconvenienced, but little else If you inconvenience 100 million people by costing them 15 minutes more a day, or a few dollars more for lack of competition, then the cost per person may be low, but the cost altogether will be high. This is the essential problem I see with the articles, they say so many jobs are useless, but often they're useful but only a sm…

I think a problem with this line of reasoning is that people forget what we used to do before we had certain conveniences. If Uber disappears, people would just read a book for 15mins or plan everything to take the extra time into account. Another problem with this line of reasoning is that people assume that they can always utilise 15m in a productive way or that not doing anything is not productive. How many times…

> I think a problem with this line of reasoning is that people forget what we used to do before we had certain conveniences. If indoor plumbing disappears, people would just read a book for 15mins or plan everything to take the extra time into account.

Of course people would get by, but their lives would be worse and advocating for making people's lives worse is kind of a shitty thing to do.

Post reply on HN