Earlier quoted context omitted.
Democracy relies on people being able to vote for what they think is right; with privacy. We removed senators right to vote for the right things in private in ~1970. After this things have gotten very bad in the US–policy wise. Polarization. Extreme lobbing. Partisanship. Fiscal policies that only favor the rich. See this: https://wtfhappenedin1971.com All of this happened after we changed the rules in Congress where…
fiscal policy changed forever in 1971 when nixon took us off the gold standard
Worker pay isn’t keeping up with inflation
521–530 of 859 posts
Re: Worker pay isn’t keeping up with inflation
#522We had an all-hands meeting recently where we got to submit anonymous questions. One of the questions was 'with inflation rising at 6%, will the company reconsider their 'standard' 2% raise?' The lady answering looks dead in the camera and goes 'Honestly? No' and goes on to talk about how we're reasonably competitive with the local market. Hey, credit where credit is due, at least she was a refreshingly straight shoo…
At every all-hands since late 2020, the topic of attrition and comp comes up. Every time, the response was that they're keeping an eye on local market conditions and attrition, and if it looks like we're falling behind we'll make adjustments.
Anyways, I left for big tech and got a 70% raise (despite a downlevel)
Re: Worker pay isn’t keeping up with inflation
#523Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is the paradox of tolerance. A truly tolerant society would tolerate intolerance, which makes the society not truly tolerant anymore. So a society would need to be a bit intolerant to stamp out intolerance, making it overall more tolerant.
Forget tolerance I want liberty back. What makes tolerance so good that it should be prioritized over everything else? I want everyone granted certain inalienable rights and then allowed to live how they want as long as they abide by their rights and the rights of others. If people want to use their right to vote, follow the process, and support something that others disagree with, that's liberty in action.
You _need_ tolerance to accomodate liberty. Otherwise those who do not tolerate your liberty will prevent it.
Re: Worker pay isn’t keeping up with inflation
#524Earlier quoted context omitted.
> most Americans are significantly worse off since the 1970s I think this is obviously false and hurts the credibility of the rest of this comment. There are many pitfalls with measuring long-term inflation. How much did an internet connection cost in the 1970s? What about a computer? What about a smartphone? These modern technologies make peoples lives much better and were somewhere between impossible and impossibly…
Internet connections cost poor people nothing in 1970 because they weren't necessary and could happily live their lives without one. The real item we're looking at here is *communication*, which was cheap: the stamp you needed to send in the form for your taxes cost a few cents. You could get away with using payphones for the few phone calls you absolutely needed to make. In 2021, internet connections and cellphones…
We can’t argue that quality of life is sooo much better when production is such a mess. The only reason we hear the complaints is because of quality of life.
People with money can handle $1 more for an order of pretzel nuggets but make them wait and extra 2 minutes for it and the labor shortage is all over the news.
Re: Worker pay isn’t keeping up with inflation
#525Earlier quoted context omitted.
yeah and most of those parents have been refinancing their homes to support their spoiled children. That is going to end real soon and many of those kids are going to witness their parents lose their homes and become impoverished due to their lazy yet extravagant lifestyles.
It's not about spoiled children, I see janitors walking around with 800 euro phones here. It's just a psychological way for low earning people to 'keep up with the Kardashians'. AS they can't buy cars or houses they buy gadgets.
I also had the same thought - it's the one luxury they can actually afford if they save up.
I dont really get how people can look at that and think that these people are better off than a middle class 1950s US family. It's insane.
Re: Worker pay isn’t keeping up with inflation
#526Earlier quoted context omitted.
Goods don't have a mind and thoughts so psychology does not apply. The good you price-compare won't become unhappy and later leave as OP described. I have no opinion on if the negotiating tactic is good or not, only that the comparison of goods and people isn't quite right IMO.
We are talking contracts, not goods. Contracts are with companies which are made up of people. So why wouldn't psychology apply? Edit: I also find the argument that employment is not a an economic transaction a really weird argument. Employers don't give raises just so that the employee feels better for example.
The OP talked about people, then your reply was about goods. Unless "contract with a supplier" was about humans as goods, that term obviously means purchasing stuff, not purchasing humans. Who uses "purchasing" when it's about humans/employees?
Goods don't have a brain and no state of mind which was at the center of the OP's comment.
Okay, back to your original reply then:
> If you are responsible for purchasing, will you ask competitors for quotes?
The OP talked about the people themselves. If we follow your line then you don't talk about the employee at all any more. You are talking about something else than the OP.
Re: Worker pay isn’t keeping up with inflation
#527Earlier quoted context omitted.
Glad this was the top comment. Wages have not kept up with cost of living for 50 years in the US. We need to stop pretending flat wages are some modern problem of inflation, and we need to stop pretending inflation is some problem caused by the pandemic.
Is it not a problem? Wages rose substantially in the years between WWII and the 1970s but isn't that the actual aberration?
I think part of the promise of increasing the quality of life of everyone after WWII wasn't only out of the goodness of the heart, but also to avoid reaching the level of generalized hate that made it possible in the first place.
Re: Worker pay isn’t keeping up with inflation
#528Earlier quoted context omitted.
Internet connections cost poor people nothing in 1970 because they weren't necessary and could happily live their lives without one. The real item we're looking at here is *communication*, which was cheap: the stamp you needed to send in the form for your taxes cost a few cents. You could get away with using payphones for the few phone calls you absolutely needed to make. In 2021, internet connections and cellphones…
Um good luck finding the car of your choice these days. Even before pando/trade war an in-demand model took weeks or months while other cars sit on lots. We can’t argue that quality of life is sooo much better when production is such a mess. The only reason we hear the complaints is because of quality of life. People with money can handle $1 more for an order of pretzel nuggets but make them wait and extra 2 minutes…
America's model of making a bunch of random models and shipping them out to sit on lots in the hope someone wants that model is bizarre.
In most other countries you order exactly what you want and they build it.
Re: Worker pay isn’t keeping up with inflation
#529Earlier quoted context omitted.
> How about the ability to drive around with GPS? Maps, and the ability to read them. > Or stay easily in touch with family living far away? Phones, you know good old land lines > Taking photos of your baby and having it stored on the cloud for free? Why do I need physical photos stored in the cloud? > The ability to learn almost anything for free? Have ya heard of libraries? Does technology make these more convenien…
> Maps, and the ability to read them. You basically need another passenger with you otherwise you'll have to do a lot of stops. I'd even say its a bit risky to drive like that. > Phones, you know good old land lines So you are saying having a high def video call with my brother living across the world, for free, is just like calling him in the 60s? It used to be crazy expensive to call abroad. And you couldn't see! >…
Driving with maps doesn't require another passenger or a lot of stops, generally. You plan your route with the map before starting out, and if necessary write the turns on a piece of note paper. You may need to stop and consult the map if you miss a turn. I'll grant that GPS is more convenient, but maps worked better than you think they did.
Phones vs. video calls, I'll mostly grant you. Long distance calls were expensive, and video gives you facial and body language cues. On the other hand, audio quality was a lot higher when everyone was on land lines, so you didn't need those cues as much to make up for indistinct audio.
Physical photos: before 2000 or so, everyone developed all of their photos. Most cameras were film, then. Even when digital cameras came into widespread use, it was common to print the best pictures. People really only started not developing photos when smartphones became common.
Libraries: I learned C from a couple of textbooks, and C++ (such as it was in 1993) from a book published by the company that sold me the compiler. All of these would have been available in a reasonably sized library, or in a small library via interlibrary loan.
Re: Worker pay isn’t keeping up with inflation
#530Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seems like you are talking about social inequality (a zero sum game) vs poverty (a non zero sum game) The idea that no one was expected to own cell phones so they didn’t enrich our lives is clearly false. Can apply this to any technological advance. So for eg. in the 1800s no one expected you to own a car. So the invention and subsequent technology driven deflation of car prices didn’t make everyone’s lives better.
> Seems like you are talking about social inequality (a zero sum game) vs poverty (a non zero sum game) The two are not opposed. There is significant overlap significantly in many ways, even in the way government treats the very definition of poverty. In most countries, you'll find that poverty is defined as a percentage of median income. Let me try to rephrase to make this more tangible. The minimum of things and se…
So.. how does that imply that people are worse off now than in 1970? Your entire thesis seems to be that the jealousy people will feel from seeing others have things they don't will outweigh all of the material gains of the last half century.
That seems.. obviously false? to me