Labor shortage or terrible jobs? • Hacker News Board

Re: Labor shortage or terrible jobs?

#911

Post by msbarnett » Sat, May 01, 2021, 6:05 PM UTC

leesalminen wrote: post #693

blihp wrote: post #665

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If raising the minimum wage will do them in, they're already halfway there if things are really [1] that dire and will end up there soon enough. So yes, people are better off not working for those types of businesses. If a business can only remain solvent by paying unreasonably low wages, it puts downward wage pressure on competing businesses and traps unskilled workers in a labor pool of dead-end jobs with little ho…

> [1] I'm suspicious of the majority of cases where this claim is made. A rational business person would see that such a business is already marginal and that they would likely be better off shutting it down and redeploying the capital elsewhere for a better return. This happens all the time. If the owner can't see this, keeping the business on life support isn't doing anyone any favors. I agree with you, I would nev…

> People like owning restaurants, despite their best financial interests.

Which is fine, but then it’s silly to base minimum wage policy on whether or not it will make somebody’s already-irrational hobby business less profitable.

Re: Labor shortage or terrible jobs?

#912

Post by malandrew » Sat, May 01, 2021, 6:26 PM UTC

atoav wrote: post #437

syshum wrote: post #414

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>which force working employees into poverty I think you have a widely unorthodox defination of "force" as no one is forced to take any job at any wage. Force in the equation would come from the government using the threat of government violence to force a wage on a business owner. A person that voluntary accepts a job for X wage is not "forced" to do so.

Yeah but the job market is not a free market, because not getting a job is existential for those seeking the job, while the company can usually just survive when a position is not filled for a certain time. This means to make this a free market many nations did the reasonable thing and introduced measures like minimum wages and unemployment benefits. This way when you loose your job the balance of power evens out a l…

> because not getting a job is existential for those seeking the job

Before jobs offered by others existed, not working in some form would have been existential for those people. This is the de facto state of existence. You'd have to at least do some form of hunter/gathering or subsistence farming.

This increasingly common idea that individuals no longer are obligated to provide for themselves is wild. The only way around it is to obligate others to provide for you instead of providing for yourself. The last time this was a common idea in the United States was in the in the antebellum South.

Re: Labor shortage or terrible jobs?

#913

Post by taurath » Sat, May 01, 2021, 6:26 PM UTC

varispeed wrote: post #854

taurath wrote: post #847

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not have the government subsidize purchases at the business, if the goal is to have as close to 0 pricing as possible and ensure the business survives regardless of its utility? People constantly argue for the rights of businesses which pay incredibly poorly, as if that is effecting mom and pop shops which are by and large already closed and gone, and when they were around ended up paying a bit more. Maybe a comm…

I think the problem may also be that mom and pop shops are taxed much more heavily than big multinational corporations, that pay very little tax and thus have huge competitive advantage over small local businesses. I would think that any government caring about the local population would look into getting those companies to pay their fair share.

The areas where people vote for less and less government tend to be the places that have the most minimal services. I have yet to see an area that truly attracts business because of having low regulation and taxes, they all seem to have absolutey no businesses because there is no infrastructure to build upon, nor an existing business community to interact with.

Re: Labor shortage or terrible jobs?

#914

Post by Itsdijital » Sat, May 01, 2021, 6:28 PM UTC

robocat wrote: post #331

losteric wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Real estate prices are also part of the problem, especially in urban cores... some Seattle and SF rents are just stupid, to say nothing of NYC

Real estate prices and rent are driven by how much people can only just afford it. If people earn more, they can afford a bigger mortgage, so house prices rise.

Yeah, but the counter to all that is building new housing, which unsurprisingly very difficult in these areas.

Re: Labor shortage or terrible jobs?

#915

Post by ItsMonkk » Sat, May 01, 2021, 6:28 PM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #888

ItsMonkk wrote: post #848

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is something that is quite nuanced that isn't apparent until you really look into the numbers. When something happens that universally makes the labor costs go up, and you expect for many businesses to go into the black, what you will instead see is that the very worst company goes out business and all of the others will put pressure on their land owner for lower rents pointing out that they are next. The landow…

> Higher labor costs makes real estate prices go down. Well, it might by your argument make commercial rents, and thus commercial prices, go down. But it also means more money chasing the median residential unit (whether rent or purchase), so it should increase residential prices. Absent zoning constraints, that would seem to encourage shifting from commercial to residential land use

Yep, completely agree.

But notice how this argument is based around the margins. When labor goes up, rents go down and food costs go up slightly. Someone who used to just barely be able buy fast-food from McDonalds will suddenly not be able to, and instead be forced to buy more from the grocery store. But there might be two customers that would have otherwise bought food at Five Guys who now buy from McDonalds.

You might see a shift from commercial to residential, or you might see a shift to 4+1 mixed. The town might buy the space and put in a park. You might put in a high-rise. Anything could happen based on the situation.

Whenever the argument of raising the minimum wage comes up, we always hear these stats that 50% of businesses will go in the black, and we will destroy the economy. It's much more subtle than that. The effect that we see is tiny tiny percentages that are overwhelmed by other factors.

Re: Labor shortage or terrible jobs?

#916

Post by gtyras2mrs » Sat, May 01, 2021, 6:32 PM UTC

betwixthewires wrote: post #361

robocat wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> arguments that allude to the real culprit, things like "I should be able to have extra money for fun" which usually translates to "I blow my money on things I can't afford and then blame the world for being broke." Should we live in a world where we are wage slaves where 100% of our earnings are spent on the bare necessities such as food and shelter? One of my friends has $20 to spend on herself after her frugal bi…

> Should we live in a world where we are wage slaves where 100% of our earnings are spent on the bare necessities such as food and shelter? No. > Surely we work to be able to spend some money on the pleasures of life? Money doesn't buy happiness. The best things in life are free. And sure, if you have money to spend on fun things, have at it. If you don't and you want to, try finding a way to do it. It really is up t…

> Money doesn't buy happiness. The best things in life are free.

No. No. Happiness is extremely difficult to find if you are financially insecure.

Money has a marginal effect on happiness after a certain limit. But to say money doesn't buy happiness is an utterly stupid lie repeated for ages by those that have more than enough money.

Re: Labor shortage or terrible jobs?

#917

Post by wizzard » Sat, May 01, 2021, 6:35 PM UTC

deburo wrote: post #618

blihp wrote: post #548

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A 10% margin also often doesn't tell the whole story of how they make their money. Nearly since its inception, a substantial portion of McDonald's long term profit came from the appreciation of the real estate the stores were built on. Operating a business on it just made it cash flow positive during the holding period. So it was essentially a REIT that happened to operate a fast food chain. Even for many mom-and-pop…

>If they honestly can't afford to pay a living wage It's not logical to kill businesses by arbitrarily raising the minimum wage. Do you think the people they employ are better off not working at all? These people may not have a decent enough salary, but they get to work as opposed to staying at home and degenerate (mentally and physically). I always thought the better solution is to help them financially in other way…

There's nothing arbitrary about paying a living wage. I could rephrase your argument as "Shouldn't businesses be able to pay poverty wages, and taxpayers can make up the difference?" If you can't stay in business without the government supporting your workers, then your business doesn't work. These businesses are effectively being subsidized by the government without giving the government a stake.

Also, I feel like this isn't even worth addressing, but no, work is not a government-sponsored day care for workers.

Re: Labor shortage or terrible jobs?

#918

Post by vagrantJin » Sat, May 01, 2021, 6:37 PM UTC

jschveibinz wrote: post #2

This article unfortunately doesn't address the business side of the problem. Fast food restaurants, or place like "Dale's" mentioned in the article, make very little profit. It is most likely below 10%. Here is an estimate: https://www.restaurant365.com/blog/what-is-the-average-profi... . A 10% profit is very modest. That's not the story of the "fat cats getting rich on the back of the workers" that the article is al…

> And all of this is free market capitalism at work. It is a continuous process of reinvention.

I agree with this sentiment. Mostly. But I can't say it freely, or with impunity - I'm on the lucky end of the spectrum partly by my own hard work, partly blind luck to be born in a middle class family, partly because my country has racial equality laws that give me the opportunity. I can negotiate my own terms for work and when I'm out of work I can freelance or build a product. But I can't swallow looking at workers as a line on an income statement. Something about it feels uncomfortable, uneasy. Like casually throwing talent and skills into the ocean when theres still so much work to do.

Sure, it's great for some. Most people in this forum are part of the economic and cognitive elite. I would expect words like automation to be thrown around freely because "optimization" and "free-market" are fantastic myths to belive in. They might even be self-fulfilling prophecies. They just never come up to help people get a leg up. Those families that could be paying taxes are going on welfare, which means we get taxed more but do we have a right to complain and try to dodge out of paying taxes to support the people we've put out of work for the sake of automation and progress? Would we be happy to automate to our hearts content if you had to pay more taxes?

Re: Labor shortage or terrible jobs?

#919

Post by isbvhodnvemrwvn » Sat, May 01, 2021, 6:41 PM UTC

derrekl wrote: post #860

Not going to speak to the article but want to layout that in 1997 when I was a waiter at Chili’s I made $2.50 an hour base wage, but with tips nearly always cleared $24/h. In 1999 I was a waiter for an upscale steakhouse in the city of Chicago and on average made about $40/h. Several of the waiters there were career waiters and had families. Many career waiters worked very hard to get jobs at higher and higher end re…

I used to live in a touristy area and there was a similar phenomenon with waitresses in the city center - the only issue was that after a few years the waitresses were let go because the employers picked prettier ones as a replacement. A colleague of mine from highschool got hit hard by that, as she thought she'll surely not be one of those that get replaced. She had to take her lifestyle a few good notches down with no higher ed and just waiting experience. She would have had no issues with getting a degree, she was smart but naive.

Re: Labor shortage or terrible jobs?

#920

Post by malandrew » Sat, May 01, 2021, 6:50 PM UTC

atoav wrote: post #778

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #574

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yeah but the job market is not a free market, because not getting a job is existential for those seeking the job, while the company can usually just survive when a position is not filled for a certain time. This is, to begin with, not true. It's common for small businesses to be operating at the margin. If you don't have someone making the sandwiches then you don't have revenue and you still have rent and utilities…

> You can pick the one that pays the most. Oh sweet summer child. When you are in debt and struggle to survive on a day to day basis, time is your enemy You cannot afford not to take a job. And if you are lucky enough to be able afford it today, you might not tomorrow. Another thing: many people need more than one job as it is now. Guess what: if you pay people a decent living wage more people can actually get jobs,…

> many people need more than one job as it is now

Needing only one job is a historical anomaly as a result of an industrial society. Historically, people would have to perform a variety of tasks to provide for oneself.

Furthermore, more than one job de-risks someone's situation just like a consultant with many clients can handle the loss of a single client and not see their income fall to zero.

It's the total hours of paid labor over N jobs that you should look at instead. If you do 60 hours a week at one job or three jobs for 20 hours each, you're doing the same amount of labor with less risk.

The only qualitative difference between one 60 hour job and three 20 hour jobs is the benefits received from working 40+ hours for a single employer, but this isn't an issue with how many jobs you work. It's an issue with an artificial asymptotic condition created by an act of legislation by government.

Every time legislation creates artificial asymptotic conditions, you're going to get actors that optimize around that artificial boundary condition. If you want to avoid the circumstance, you need legislative solutions that are continuous in nature instead of asymptotic.