Declining worker power vs. rising monopoly power: explaining recent macro trends • Hacker News Board

Re: Declining worker power vs. rising monopoly power: explaining recent macro trends

#401

Post by randomname93857 » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 10:40 PM UTC

dcolkitt wrote: post #215

jakozaur wrote: post #45

In almost all USA industries, there is increasing amount of consolidation. The top 4 companies' in almost any industry has a larger share of the total market: https://www.economist.com/briefing/2016/03/26/too-much-of-a-... Some consolidation is natural, but a huge part is caused by mergers and acquisitions (M&A) fulled by Private Equity. The M&A benefits the shareholders of participating companies at the expense of c…

Monopolization almost certainly is occurring. The left usually cites weak antitrust enforcement. The right usually cites regulatory barriers that make it expensive to compete without economies of scale. I actually think both sides are at least partially correct. However what almost everyone overlooks is the demographic transition. The US, along with every other developed economy, is significantly older today than it…

> The US, along with every other developed economy, is significantly older today than it was 40 years ago. As employees are squeezed out of profit, life gets more expensive and it gets harder to have kids.

Re: Declining worker power vs. rising monopoly power: explaining recent macro trends

#402

Post by sudosysgen » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 10:41 PM UTC

ls612 wrote: post #372

sudosysgen wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's look at this mathematically. If the average person changes jobs every four to five years, and spends two-three weeks unemployed doing so, as they already have a plan for their next job, you would expect a job-related unemployement rate of around 1% due to job changes.

In practice it makes up around 2%. The remainder in good times is people who were just fired, a few layoffs (since even in booms businesses can fail) and a few people entering the workforce.

Sure. That is less than half of the normal unemployement rate.

Re: Declining worker power vs. rising monopoly power: explaining recent macro trends

#403

Post by RNCTX » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 10:48 PM UTC

_2d30 wrote: post #216

RNCTX wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Taxes are not punishment. Taxes exist because a certain amount of wealth is required to maintain a state. I understand that the financial/business world has been trying to convince people otherwise since the mid 1970s, but they are still as wrong today as they were then. Tax “fairness” is therefore simple. He who earns the most should pay the most. You cannot expatriate dollars. The currency is issued by the state an…

> Taxes are not punishment. Taxes exist because a certain amount of wealth is required to maintain a state. Who is saying taxes shouldn’t exist here? I’m advocating for a specific form of wealth tax. I clearly believe taxes are necessary. As for them not being a punishment, this is clearly a silly semantic argument focused on trying to frame this emotionally. People respond to incentives and change their behavior whe…

The point I’m getting at is taxes should be for raising revenue, period. The minute you step into trying to influence behavior via tax code, as the US has done, you are doing something wholly different from raising revenue.

> Jesus Christ, yes you can. It’s like you’ve never heard of offshore banks

I don’t think you appreciate how governments already monitor wire transfers, and how they are reversible within a certain timeframe if a legal authority chooses to intercept one.

Again, this is not a complex problem since the tools and authority already exist, it’s a political will problem, in that there are nearly zero elected officials willing to cross a billionaire.

> How someone can speak like this and not see the value of a wealth tax in the form of a land tax blows my mind.

Because I live in a state in the US without income taxes and with a high reliance on land taxes. It makes no difference, corporations bribe their way into temporary (as in decades) exclusions from land taxes, and individuals are left to pay what the chemical plant literally polluting their back yards is exempt from.

There is no logarithm or formula that fixes all of this. What fixes it is 10 years without parole at hard labor for any owner or officer of a business entity who gives anything of value to any employee of the state, whether that employee be elected, appointed, or hired. The same penalty will automatically be applied to the state official who has been paid.

Re: Declining worker power vs. rising monopoly power: explaining recent macro trends

#404

Post by missedthecue » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 10:57 PM UTC

Frondo wrote: post #388

WalterBright wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When Google tried to lay fiber in various municipalities, they failed because those municipalities would not permit it.

Those were all local municipalities, responsive to their electorate - if the surfers in a community wanted Google fiber huts, they could elect councils who would allow them. I think it's reasonable that people should have local control over their city environs, even if it means a multinational like Google can't come in and build new infrastructure. It's not a "will of the people, unless Google wants to build fiber hu…

>Those were all local municipalities, responsive to their electorate - if the surfers in a community wanted Google fiber huts, they could elect councils who would allow them

This is an idealistic line of thinking, but as a practical matter, is completely untrue. Essentially 0% of America understand their county commissioners' stance on ISP competition, myself included. No one campaigns on those things.

It's a lot like saying that electorates are responsible for police violence because sheriffs are elected officials after all.

Re: Declining worker power vs. rising monopoly power: explaining recent macro trends

#405

Post by missedthecue » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 10:59 PM UTC

deegles wrote: post #112

lanevorockz wrote: post #59

Trying to break the conditioning here but government should always tax in a way that it incentive WORK. The way things are Wealth is no longer being produced, so those who have it will be on top because income will never be enough to prop you up. Therefore we should want a Growth market so that more wealth is produced and risk averse people will still be rich but more people will become as rich as them. To resolve In…

Why should everyone have to work? We are 100% capable of creating a society where everyone's basic needs are met with the automation and technology we have today. The idea that a person is only worth something if they work needs to be deeply reexamined.

Because the only way to increase the standard of living is to increase productivity. You cannot inflate your way to prosperity. It is a mathematical impossiblity.

Re: Declining worker power vs. rising monopoly power: explaining recent macro trends

#406

Post by ryandrake » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 11:00 PM UTC

s1artibartfast wrote: post #297

fsckboy wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

that's not what he's saying. He's saying higher overall income, and it comes with lower risk than startups.

When I hear tech giant, I think FAANG, but I'm not sure this is representative of the options most programmers have. It certainly isnt representative of the compensation at most large companies.

In addition, I think rank-and-file FAANG salaries, when discussed here, tend to get grossly exaggerated. I know lots of people working at these companies and none of them have a boat. Lots of them have roommates in cramped apartments in SF like other tech company employees. Are there some highly paid employees at top tech companies? Sure. Do most employees at these companies have vacation homes and private jets? Nope.

Re: Declining worker power vs. rising monopoly power: explaining recent macro trends

#407

Post by missedthecue » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 11:02 PM UTC

cvlasdkv wrote: post #192

fsckboy wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

no reexamination necessary, I'm drawn to emulate and recommend the humans that work hard toward long term goals. I like when Darwinism shows tangible progress against entropy rather than producing viruses that leech off of life.

What long term goal is slaving away at McDonalds or Wal-Mart accomplishing? All the people advancing society are being paid pittances compared to the true leeches (landlords and shareholders). People should not be required to work to survive. People should be required to work to make the world a better place. Most people work bullshit jobs that do not advance anything but the wealth of the 1%.

I should not be forced to subsidize someone with the fruits of my labor just because they're so lazy they would rather not be a productive member of society. That is toxic and wholly regressive.

Re: Declining worker power vs. rising monopoly power: explaining recent macro trends

#408

Post by downerending » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 11:02 PM UTC

wpietri wrote: post #211

alexose wrote: post #142

I find it very disappointing that the most reliably lucrative career arc for a programmer nowadays is to get hired by a tech giant and stay there as long as possible. And the second most is probably to go to work for a company that could get gobbled up by a tech giant. I've made a career out of small startups, and I wouldn't trade it for a thing. On the other hand, if I'd gone to work for Amazon straight out of colle…

And what kills me about this is it almost seems like the big tech companies are just grabbing up engineers to no purpose. When I hear stories about what people are actually doing at larger companies, it often seems somewhere between miniscule and just plain empty. And it's not like a lot of the people telling these stories don't understand that. But they're happy enough wasting a third of their day at that salary.

A big problem with filthy rich outfits is that they can simply afford to do this. My two highest-paying jobs were almost sinecures. The teams were massively overstaffed, and it could be quite difficult to find productive things to work on. I spent a lot of time simply waiting, which is to say killing time.

If your goal in life is to be rich, it's not bad, I guess. If you really love doing good tech, it's stultifying.

Re: Declining worker power vs. rising monopoly power: explaining recent macro trends

#409

Post by missedthecue » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 11:05 PM UTC

jtolmar wrote: post #189

RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #27

The big issue is supply and demand. With increasing automation and global supply chains, there is a huge amount of labor available relative to the need. In the past, a union strike at a plant would see a generous long-term contract and benefits for the workers. Now, it is likely for the plant to be moved or workers replaced with automation.

Labor is not as simple as supply and demand; a huge portion of a worker's value is in their knowledge and ability to train other workers. When they strike, they are unavailable to train replacements. Most of the people reading this are likely to be tech workers, so imagine what it would be like to try to join a company that was on strike[1]. How do you log in to your computer? Where's the bug tracker? What are the cu…

"a huge portion of a worker's value is in their knowledge and ability to train other workers. When they strike, they are unavailable to train replacements."

Which would make them more valuable to employers and more in demand. You're proving that wages are a product of supply and demand

Re: Declining worker power vs. rising monopoly power: explaining recent macro trends

#410

Post by dlp211 » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 11:05 PM UTC

milesvp wrote: post #380

dlp211 wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My understanding is this has been a very real problem for farmers for many generations, and they have been the largest opponents for estate taxes. Your understanding is a talking point created by the Republican party and has no real basis in reality. https://www.factcheck.org/2017/09/death-tax-talking-point-wo... https://www.cbpp.org/blog/the-myth-that-the-estate-tax-threa... https://money.cnn.com/2017/10/10/news/e…

Yeah, you may be right about the republican talking point with farmers. I have no direct anecdotes with farmers, and with the one friend I have in the agriculture world, the topic never came up. The main anecdotes I have are with people who have estates that were big enough to have to worry about what would happen to their businesses when they died, since they couldn't just pass on the business to their heir. This is…

> The main anecdotes I have are with people who have estates that were big enough to have to worry about what would happen to their businesses when they died, since they couldn't just pass on the business to their heir.

I'm sorry, but this is just the same talking point reframed.

If you have a business that is large enough to be subject to estate taxes, you should have enough time and resources to talk to an estate attorney and learn how to move the assets into an appropriate corporate governance structure such that it is no longer a real issue.