Labor shortage or terrible jobs? • Hacker News Board

Re: Labor shortage or terrible jobs?

#81

Post by cosmodisk » Fri, Apr 30, 2021, 4:28 PM UTC

unethical_ban wrote: post #21

Occasionally, Twitter provides some nice insights in digestible forms (of course, nuance gets stripped). I saw a post recently that said something like "We watch Star Trek and marvel at their post-scarcity world. We are living in a post-scarcity world now, but all the benefits are being funneled by wage slaves up to the 0.1%." Paraphrased. I was talking with a friend who mentioned that a local pizza place is offering…

Not sure about the US,but here in Europe,or Britain,to be more precise, many places expect you to do cleaning, serving tables, etc. All this 'joy' for minimum wage+a few pennies more. Apparently all the hospital sector is struggling to hire because people either moved abroad or went into more stable sectors,so now newspapers are plastered with articles how poor restaurants can't hire.

Re: Labor shortage or terrible jobs?

#82

Post by flybrand » Fri, Apr 30, 2021, 4:28 PM UTC

unethical_ban wrote: post #21

Occasionally, Twitter provides some nice insights in digestible forms (of course, nuance gets stripped). I saw a post recently that said something like "We watch Star Trek and marvel at their post-scarcity world. We are living in a post-scarcity world now, but all the benefits are being funneled by wage slaves up to the 0.1%." Paraphrased. I was talking with a friend who mentioned that a local pizza place is offering…

> We watch Star Trek and marvel at their post-scarcity world. We are living in a post-scarcity world now, but all the benefits are being funneled by wage slaves up to the 0.1%."

Re: Labor shortage or terrible jobs?

#83

Post by pydry » Fri, Apr 30, 2021, 4:29 PM UTC

qudat wrote: post #36

andreshb wrote: post #6

If a business can’t pay a living wage, automate the role.

I disagree. Not everyone needs a livable wage (e.g. teenagers) and by removing entry level positions we eliminate the lowest rung of the ladder. This is not a good outcome.

Not a good outcome for employers. Good for everyone else.

Re: Labor shortage or terrible jobs?

#84

Post by colpabar » Fri, Apr 30, 2021, 4:29 PM UTC

xondono wrote: post #9

LatteLazy wrote: post #3

Neither. If employers really wanted more workers, they'd up wages. If employees really wanted to work they'd settle for less. If neither is happening then everyone is happy and anyone complaining is a liar in the economic sense.

This. Everyone is trying to milk the government for “support”, especially if they can get it in cash.

Why shouldn't they? The government taxes everything it possibly can, and for the past year the government has put a ton of restrictions in place that caused a lot of people to lose their jobs. It is now time for the government to start using those taxes to provide the safety net it promises us.

If the pentagon can "lose" 125 billion dollars ($125,000,000,000), I really don't care that people with the ability to "milk" the gov for cash are taking advantage of that ability. It's their own money in the first place!

Re: Labor shortage or terrible jobs?

#85

Post by throwaway292893 » Fri, Apr 30, 2021, 4:29 PM UTC

colinmhayes wrote: post #44

throwaway292893 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The people with jobs paying taxes aren't very happy to support freeloaders simply taking unemployment because they don't want to work.

I feel happy enough with the situation. No one should be forced to work a shitty job imo.

Well I'm not. Now there's two anecdotes to work with.

I worked a shitty job to get through college, it's a stepping stone.

These jobs aren't meant to live on. They should be used as part time jobs for people transitioning in their careers, like students.

When you give handouts to people who don't want to work you are not doing them any favors. They become reliant and trapped in that loop.

That's not to say there shouldn't be a safety net with strict qualifications. You're doing no service to the people who need it by allowing those who don't.

We should be spending money creating new, better paying jobs, not new social programs.

Re: Labor shortage or terrible jobs?

#86

Post by kokanator » Fri, Apr 30, 2021, 4:30 PM UTC

cratermoon wrote: post #51

kokanator wrote: post #28

Pre-covid businesses which paid borderline wages are going to find it really difficult to compete with the government. Basically, you have an administration 'silently' waging war of certain types of business or jobs without needing to pass controversial legislation for things like a minimum wage increase or universal income. If it feel subversive, it is. But the cost of controversy these days causes people to find al…

That's a terrible take. The government is not "waging war" on businesses. Businesses that were (are) paying starvation wages simply socialize the costs of doing business. When Amazon's warehouse workers and Wal*Mart retail employees are also collecting SNAP benefits, their employers are getting all the benefits of low wages but – because they don't pay their fair share of taxes – the employers are avoiding the extern…

Note I didn't say whether it was good or bad. These are real things that are occurring.

The government has a long history of subsidizing businesses. Think seasonal businesses that 'lay off' their workforce to collect unemployment until the season opens again.

Sometimes we believe these subsidies are good other times we don't. Do I believe companies as large as Amazon and Walmart should be subsidized? Hardly.

Do I think small businesses of all sort could use a break here and there when faced with the subsidized giants? Absolutely.

Try to go to your local hardware store, it doesn't exist any more. How about the corner grocery, gone. These guys needed a break but we put the screws to them and let the Giant more 'efficient' businesses off the hook.

Re: Labor shortage or terrible jobs?

#87

Post by oh_sigh » Fri, Apr 30, 2021, 4:30 PM UTC

riskable wrote: post #68

qudat wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. Not everyone needs a livable wage (e.g. teenagers) and by removing entry level positions we eliminate the lowest rung of the ladder. This is not a good outcome.

...but imagine the economic benefits of giving teenagers a living wage. People who have loads of extra money to spend on unnecessary items (because presumably they're not paying for the bare necessities like food and housing).

But they already get a living wage, since for almost all working teenagers, their biggest expenses are usually taken care of by their parents (rent & health insurance).

Re: Labor shortage or terrible jobs?

#88

Post by Clubber » Fri, Apr 30, 2021, 4:30 PM UTC

xondono wrote: post #9

LatteLazy wrote: post #3

Neither. If employers really wanted more workers, they'd up wages. If employees really wanted to work they'd settle for less. If neither is happening then everyone is happy and anyone complaining is a liar in the economic sense.

This. Everyone is trying to milk the government for “support”, especially if they can get it in cash.

I mean, every year the government milks me, and it certainly is in cash.

Re: Labor shortage or terrible jobs?

#89

Post by throwaway292893 » Fri, Apr 30, 2021, 4:31 PM UTC

iaw wrote: post #74

throwaway292893 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The people with jobs paying taxes aren't very happy to support freeloaders simply taking unemployment because they don't want to work.

I pay my fair share of taxes and I'm happy to support 'freeloaders' when they're unemployed and need support. Especially if it leads to a universal living wage from employers. Don't speak for me please.

I'm speaking for me and those I know. My response was to GP saying everyone is happy. I am not.

Also, I'm not talking about the people who need support, I'm talking about the people taking advantage and staying on unemployment because they don't want to work.

Re: Labor shortage or terrible jobs?

#90

Post by pydry » Fri, Apr 30, 2021, 4:31 PM UTC

thrower123 wrote: post #29

The problem is essentially that you can get paid $X to not work at all, or you can maybe get paid $Y to work some shitty job. But you can't get the $X that you'd get if you didn't work at all, and add on $Z dollars working a job of some kind. The perverse incentives of these programs around their phaseouts are and have long been a reality of low-income communities.

This is by design. It's a good way to inhibit employees asking for wage hikes.