Keynes had a prediction that we would be working 15 hour work weeks by now.
In your opinion, why haven’t we obtained this?
101–110 of 764 posts
Keynes had a prediction that we would be working 15 hour work weeks by now.
In your opinion, why haven’t we obtained this?
The Fed is about to induce 3 years worth of rising unemployment by their own estimates, so the days of workers not needing to take crap jobs out of desperation will soon be at an end. https://qz.com/2178359/the-fed-predicts-3-years-of-rising-un...
Everyone and their mother knew that printing money since 2008 was going to blow up one day. Technology and unsubstantiated sectors allowed them to print without repercussions for a while and the administration and them also tried to fool people into believing the inflation was transitory... Reckless idiots. And now wage labor is the one to suffer most.
4TT in spending for BBB? Uhhuh! Even Yellen said it was crazy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If it's anything like retail, a lot of these places work on the assumption that there are enough people who too desperate for a job that they'll come regardless of the working conditions.
Yep, and when the free market sets up conditions to allow those people to be slightly less desperate the Fed will chime in about how unemployment is too low and we need more desparate people, while the wall st pundits go on and on lamenting how rising worker prices might mean that the companies make profits that gasp don't set records. Because apparently the only measure of a good economy is record profits - regular…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There's a surplus of management eager to exploit workers. Can also be written "There's a surplus of customer eager to pay the lowest possible price even if that means exploiting workers." As shown by the success of Chinese super low cost brands wether we are talking electronics, fashion etc.
> "There's a surplus of customer eager to pay the lowest possible price even if that means exploiting workers." This is just wrong. First, Amazon’s prices and their wages for warehouse workers aren’t directly connected. If they were, amazon wouldn’t have posted 200B in profit in 2021. Given the 1.6mil employees, that’s $125k per employee of profit. Amazon could pay MUCH more, and still hold the same prices. Second, t…
If Amazon increases wages - and thus prices - what do you think will happen:
1. People will still buy amazon because they have a higher wage so they ca afford it
2. People will buy more stuff from another store that provides cheaper prices while exploiting Chinese workers instead of American ones.
Of course it's 2.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Likewise, I’ve always found it amusing that right wing business guys pay lip service to being against illegal immigration, yet they move their meat packing plants to nowhere-ville.
"use illegal immigration for meat packing" isn't a broadly-held right-wing position, it's something certain unprincipled business owners do (and I'm not even sure that they're universally right-wing). In contrast, "increasing wages" and "increasing mass immigration" are broadly-held left-wing positions. Again, this doesn't suggest incoherence on the left.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is the sad reality. The associated wage stabilization is going to be necessary for us to control inflation. SWEs probably don't need worry about remaining employed, but the days of salary wars will be over.
> The associated wage stabilization is going to be necessary for us to control inflation. It won't. Everyone involved in business dealing with physical goods knows it's a supply side problem. Fiscal policy will do little to control inflation at this time. The Fed of course knows this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You could argue the reason is that they weren’t good enough.
Needing to see a doctor suddenly means you're a poor worker?
For as long as they are (seen as) trivially replaceable, an employee that sees a doctor, or has health concerns, or uses benefits of any kind, or really has any slip in their productivity even to the slightest degree is a poorer worker than one that doesn't.
This stops working if you run out of people to hire, or if the cost of hiring increases past a certain threshold.
It is the most rational way for the dominant corporation in the current economic system to act, if they can get away with it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Some parts of the right have advocated for more skilled immigration, which would tend to equalize wages across the board (mitigating a non-trivial cause of inequality) while raising fewer social concerns compared to the unregulated immigration of lower-skill workers. Unfortunately, many left-wing folks tend to oppose such proposals, with the usual 'they tuk er jerbs!!1' arguments. Just look at the reactions here at H…
I'm not sure that H1B visas are a particularly politically polarized position. I could easily see people on the right arguing against H1B visas on the basis that we should keep American jobs for Americans. I don't think there's broad agreement on H1Bs on the right?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, but what's the argument? "The left wants some immigration, but not a lot"? Because we already have "some" immigration, so presumably they want more immigration, and presumably they oppose constraining that immigration by education level or wealth or etc, hence "mass". In other words, "mass" doesn't refer to an amount, but a lack of filtration/selection/etc. Note also that this isn't even an inherently bad thing…
I don't know what you mean by "what's the argument"? Policies and the impact (something that should hopefully inform a policy) are more nuanced than just "mass migration" "more migration" and so on. Your understanding seems entirely disconnected from actual policy. I can't possibly explain something that is going to be different from person to person or politician to politician, even more so if for you it only ends u…
I'm asking "what is your argument?" What argument are you making?
> Policies and the impact (something that should hopefully inform a policy) are more nuanced than just "mass migration" "more migration" and so on.
Of course, and still we speak in shorthand all the time because regurgitating the complete nuance in every single Internet comment is untenable. If "left-wing folks generally support mass immigration" is inaccurate or incomplete, let's talk about that--what nuance am I overlooking?
The Fed is about to induce 3 years worth of rising unemployment by their own estimates, so the days of workers not needing to take crap jobs out of desperation will soon be at an end. https://qz.com/2178359/the-fed-predicts-3-years-of-rising-un...
Those idiots! Everyone and their mother knew that printing money since 2008 was going to blow up one day. Technology and unsubstantiated sectors allowed them to print without repercussions for a while and the administration and them also tried to fool people into believing the inflation was transitory... Reckless idiots. And now wage labor is the one to suffer most. 4TT in spending for BBB? Uhhuh! Even Yellen said it…