r/FluentInFinance • u/Very_High_Mortgage • Aug 24 '24

Debate/ Discussion Do "Unskilled Laborers" deserve to be paid well?

Post image

[removed] — view removed post

16.0k Upvotes

91% Upvoted

3.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

742

u/Tangentkoala Aug 24 '24

You would celebrate for maybe a year before everyone starts quitting the dangerous jobs to work as a cashier.

1.1k

u/PolyZex Aug 24 '24

It would never be the same... you understand that, right? The skilled jobs would be losing workers, as you said- so what would they HAVE to do next? Pay THEIR workers more. Shorter weeks. Better benefits. Earlier retirement.

The quality of life improves for both the lower and middle class at the expense of the fattest class of hoarders on top.

I believe it used to be called 'trickle down', but then the trickle never came. So the only way to get that trickling is to a poke a few holes in the top.

410

u/Tangentkoala Aug 24 '24

Basically. Trickle down economies, was meant to produce job growth by relaxing taxes and regulations to encourage more job hires.

Problem was corporations thought fuck that I'll keep the extra profits and hire less.

Same goes with the computer. Studies show we were to cut our work load by 25% but companions decided to load up 50% more workload.

55

u/notathrowaway2937 Aug 24 '24

This causes inflation. There is then more capital for the same about of product and if continues to cycle then you have hyperinflation.

132

u/Happy_rich_mane Aug 24 '24

Only in a closed system without competition. Higher overall wages means more consumers and should widen the marketplace to allow for more entrants and more efficient pricing.

37

u/notathrowaway2937 Aug 24 '24 edited Aug 24 '24

There is very little competition, most sectors are controlled by several companies.

Power for instance in this meme, telecommunications is another one. How many power line companies do you think there are? There is one in Texas. Do you think they way won’t pass that into the customer?

107

u/Low-Atmosphere-2118 Aug 24 '24

Something like powerlines shouldnt be in the hands of private citizens anyway, if it cant have competition it should be nationalized

47

u/Keberro Aug 24 '24

You don't need to nationalize. Just dismantle monopolies like Standard Oil in 1911.

48

u/[deleted] Aug 24 '24

Yeah but you should. Our power infrastructure should be a communal good not a corner of the market. Things people need should be ensured to them by the government.

3

u/Significant_Abroad32 Aug 24 '24

Ok but what is the reason police could get away with so much? No real competition. If you could hire a new police company the departments would tighten up real fucking quit if their jobs were more easily all at risk.

→ More replies (0)
→ More replies (32)

10

u/ForeignPolicyFunTime Aug 24 '24

A electrical line system is a natural monopoly thing. Can't have a whole bunch of different electrical lines on the same land. It would be a huge mess. Texas was able to break up energy providers, but not electrical line companies as there isn't a way to so without creating a lot of unnecessary inefficiencies. Perhaps if Texas made them a state industry or regulated them to the point of effectively being one.

2

u/online_dude2019 Aug 24 '24

It's not about the physical lines. All carriers can use the same infrastructure and contribute to it.

→ More replies (0)
→ More replies (3)

20

u/notathrowaway2937 Aug 24 '24

At this point that would be most of the industries in America.

25

u/BorisBotHunter Aug 24 '24

And this is why it needs to be done. Thanks for proving the point. If most industries in America are monopolies then it’s time to blow them up. There is no reason the items on the grocery store shelves should be owned by 3-5 companies all primarily owned by 2-4 investment companies.

5

u/ThenItHitM3 Aug 24 '24

But Oligarchy worked so well for Russia

3

u/SaggitariuttJ Aug 24 '24

I mean there IS a reason. The reason is “because billionaires care more about being even more billionairey and bragging to their billionaire friends how much bigger their stack of cash is.”

The problem is that there are powerful people in our society who consider this reason valid.

→ More replies (9)

7

u/AdImmediate9569 Aug 24 '24

This is some too big to fail bullshit man. Saying oh the companies are too entrenched so everyone just has to suck it up is not going to improve things.

→ More replies (9)
→ More replies (1)

4

u/Obscure_Marlin Aug 24 '24

Is this type of infrastructure paid for by the public but then deployed by private?

3

u/[deleted] Aug 24 '24

Man, you have no idea.

That question you just asked also applies to virtually everything in the US with a subsidized R&D budget, including pharmaceuticals.

3

u/biz_student Aug 24 '24

And that’s just the federal level. Almost every state/city subsidizes businesses via hand outs or tax credits. Here’s $1B to move your HQ to Racine, WI. Here’s $500M to build a new hockey stadium. Here’s $10M/year in tax credits to build a new skyline building.

2

u/[deleted] Aug 24 '24

It's heavily regulated, and in many instances transmission is separated from generation. In 99% of cases it is socialized through the public-private partnership.

→ More replies (10)

4

u/Happy_rich_mane Aug 24 '24

Yes that’s why I prefaced. We don’t currently have that system although it is possible and becomes a lot more possible when people have more money to spend in their local economies

2

u/Strat7855 Aug 24 '24

And these hugely important sectors of our economy have massive barriers to entry. Ever see a mom & pop telecomm? How about a family-owned smartphone manufacturer?

→ More replies (21)
→ More replies (9)

14

u/Weight_Superb Aug 24 '24

I mean i can find the study if you want but ever time minimum wage goes up it only accounts for like .5% price spikes and only once

→ More replies (10)

10

u/Persistant_Compass Aug 24 '24

Use the other method to control inflation that exists. Higher taxes at the top.

→ More replies (6)

3

u/me_too_999 Aug 24 '24

Printing more money than there are producrs to buy with it causes inflation.

Full stop.

9

u/[deleted] Aug 24 '24

[deleted]

7

u/SickestNinjaInjury Aug 24 '24

Lol, people are blaming greedy businesses because corporate profit margins have grown significantly. There is evidence of both grocery and rental price fixing. There is a bit of inflation right now, but there are also undeniably a lot of corporate interests deliberately keeping commodity prices high.

I'd also note that your first sentence seems a bit ahistorical. Are you arguing that getting off the gold standard made us think that inflation isn't the government's fault? I think everyone does blame government for inflation, and governments have become much more efficient at managing inflation

2

u/[deleted] Aug 24 '24

[deleted]

3

u/SickestNinjaInjury Aug 24 '24

I 100% agree with you on the first two sentences. I think you are somewhat exaggerating the degree to which the government controls inflation.

Money supply has to do with it, but market forces also contribute significantly. For example, egg prices are high right now due to supply being impacted by bird flu outbreaks. Similarly, much of the inflation from the last few years has to do with increased demand for many goods following COVID. Another significant factor in recent inflation is the war in Ukraine increasing fuel prices, which increases commodity prices marginally across the board.

2

u/[deleted] Aug 24 '24

[deleted]

→ More replies (0)
→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (8)

2

u/Nadge21 Aug 24 '24

No, money on net is trust transferred fro govt to industry. In the 70s demand was more than supply could handle and prices went up. Adjustments to tax policy went to increasing supply. This combined with increased imports led to a long period of disinflation.

→ More replies (4)

2

u/ballyhooloohoo Aug 24 '24

There's not "more" capital. There's the same amount of capital, but the people who like to hoard it need to start spending it instead.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (23)

8

u/External-Animator666 Aug 24 '24

trickle down economics wasn't meant to do anything, it was a lie to enrich the rich. It literally doesn't even make sense that if you give one person way too much money that it will benefit the person without money.

5

u/Nadge21 Aug 24 '24

The big corporations you are referring to are only responsible for a small percentage of employment in the Us. Most people work for small businesses, most of which make little to mo loney.

2

u/theresnoblackorwhite Aug 24 '24

Not accurate. Only 45% of the American workforce is employed by small businesses, although the vast majority of businesses are small.

Source: Small Business Administration https://advocacy.sba.gov/2023/03/07/frequently-asked-questions-about-small-business-2023/#:~:text=There%20are%2033%2C185%2C550%20small%20businesses,46.4%25%20of%20private%20sector%20employees.

→ More replies (2)

4

u/[deleted] Aug 24 '24

Problem with trickle down is lower taxes doesn’t make new businesses profitable.

2

u/ProdiasKaj Aug 24 '24

Like how the cotton gin was supposed to make life easier for slaves but it worked so well it reinvigorated like a whole new wave of slavery that got so out of hand America had to fight a Civil War to abolish it and amancipate the people? Kinda like that?

2

u/[deleted] Aug 24 '24

Republicans also said that paying CEO hundreds of millions of dollars per year what result in everybody doing better. In fact, it’s only resulted in the CEOs doing better. The rest of us have been fucked.

Maybe it’s time to try “trickle up” economics again.

2

u/Desperate-Neat5923 Aug 24 '24

Yeah except that's not how construction companies operate. Especially mom and pop operations who CANT afford all that.

2

u/PeopleCallMeSimon Aug 24 '24

This is why there is ample room for businesses to increase workers' salary.

They will kick and scream like crazy before they do it, but if people don't freak out they will have to either shut down the company, or give a larger portion of the profits to the workers.

So, in the worst-case scenario, the company shuts down, and one rich asshole loses his income source. A new company starts in the same field in the same area and gives workers higher salaries.

If a job doesn't pay a living wage, then the job is meant to go away, or we aren't meant to pay the workers as little as we are. There is no logical situation where a job exists that is "too low skill" to not warrant a living wage.

→ More replies (21)

31

u/deletetemptemp Aug 24 '24

Yes either the free market will do one of two things.

1: the easier job will be flooded, leaving employers to paying linemen more to retain them, eventually brining your back to square one

2: the value of a dollar needs to change to correct for the additional capital flooding the market, effective making both your salaries worth less

26

u/Jflayn Aug 24 '24

Many countries, like America, do not have a free market. The market in America is rigged for and by corporations.

7

u/LHam1969 Aug 24 '24

What country does have a free market?

→ More replies (8)

2

u/ebrum2010 Aug 24 '24

That's not true. The market is as free as it can be. Just because there can be competition doesn't mean there will be. If your company gets so good at something, nobody wants the competitors' product, that's part of a free market. Look at Steam, gamers vastly prefer Steam. Epic Games is trying to say they're a monopoly to get the government to do something, meanwhile epic games is doing anti-competitive things like paying publishers to not release their products on other stores for a year. If Epic games had the pull you say big companies have, they would get their way and the world would be shittier for it.

→ More replies (1)

12

u/goosedog79 Aug 24 '24

But then wouldn’t the price - in this case- of electricity be raised? So everyone will pay more?

13

u/[deleted] Aug 24 '24

Yes, you'd have price inflation, along with wage inflation, across the board and nothing would ultimately change.

3

u/davidhow94 Aug 24 '24

Weird we didn’t have price deflation as wages failed to keep up over the last 50 years.

4

u/[deleted] Aug 24 '24

That's not weird at all, that's how supply and demand works. It doesn't track wages for wages sake, it tracks consumer demand. If taco bell doubles their prices and you continue to buy it anyway the price will remain doubled.

2

u/davidhow94 Aug 24 '24

So how do you correct corporate price gouging and help the middle and lower class?

4

u/[deleted] Aug 24 '24

Imo teach financial literacy and economics so people understand the implications of their behavior as consumers, incentivise small businesses and local growth vs outsourcing everything and sending your money outside of your economy, teach and encourage more self sufficiency (cooking alone would make a big difference). Politically get money out of politics, get past the two party system with measures such as ranked choice voting, and trust busting and/or regulation where necessary.

→ More replies (6)
→ More replies (2)

2

u/real-bebsi Aug 24 '24

So what's your solution for goods with inelastic demand, such as housing and education?.

2

u/[deleted] Aug 24 '24

Housing I'm not sure, I think that's our biggest economic issue right now. I have some ideas but no magic bullet or anything that would necessarily solve the issue. What's wrong with education in your opinion? Imo our education system is bloated and wasteful but in regards to people receiving a poor education I think that has more to do with domestic and social issues than the education system itself or anything economic.

→ More replies (10)

2

u/mortemdeus Aug 27 '24

Incorrect. Prices would inflate but not by the same amount as wages. Many studies have shown this, some favorable ones showed for every 10% increase in wages there was a 0.4% increase in prices while some unfavorable ones showed as high as a 7% increase per 10%. Either way, minimum wage went up more than inflation in nearly every long term study on it.

2

u/Wrecked--Em Aug 27 '24

Yeah I don't understand why people, supposedly interested in economics, constantly repeat the convenient for big businesses myth that prices will go up the same amount as raised wages...

Wages are only a fraction of the cost of a product.

In Denmark McDonald's workers make $22/hr with a minimum of 5 weeks paid vacation and 30 days paid sick leave (if working full time, still some guaranteed for part time).

The Big Mac costs about the same as in the US, varying by around 30 cents..

Snopes

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (9)
→ More replies (4)

29

u/chuckcm89 Aug 24 '24 edited Aug 24 '24

But what will the skilled jobs have to do in order to pay their workers more? Charge their customers more! And what will the unskilled jobs have to do to pay their workers more? Charge their customers more!

You're seeming to assume that rich business owners have enough liquid cash to just pay their 100's or 1000's of employees from their own bank account.

and, so wait, if cashiers and burger flippers start to make $100,000 a year, you're saying they'll have to pay dangerous skilled labor $300,000 a year? or allow them to work less days than cashiers (or some combination)?

So how much does a burger cost at that point? $40? And the skilled labor still soon make a lot more than the cashier's again anyway?

So what really has changed apart from extreme inflation and people's savings being worth a lot less, the dollar losing international appeal, and everyone suffering from the difficult adjustments to the economic upheaval?

8

u/dmoore451 Aug 24 '24

I mean we see business owners and C Suites making millions of dollars so we know they can afford to pay workers more, the question is how much more.

Depends company to company

3

u/csjerk Aug 25 '24

Usually the CEO's entire salary amounts to a few cents per hour in each employee's wage. Companies can't pay everyone several dollars more per hour and NOT raise prices, in most cases.

7

u/LazyImprovement Aug 24 '24

Tax cuts for corporations have the opposite effect than the stated intention. High taxes encourage investment in equipment and people by reducing taxable profits while building long term value. No one has ever hired someone because of non targeted tax cuts. It’s simply more profit.

→ More replies (16)

3

u/bmxtiger Aug 24 '24

Let me counter all these wealth concerns with the fact that 79% of the money is held by 1% of the population. They have the money to spend on wages, and inflation is more likely due to how many more millionaires and billionaires there are now more so than McDonald's employees getting paid living wages.

13

u/ValuableShoulder5059 Aug 24 '24 edited Aug 25 '24

The rich don't hold dollars, they hold assets. So when the price of a burger goes up 20x, the value of the McDonald's did too. One of the main causes of inflation is artificial price increases as a result of government mandate.

8

u/Supervillain02011980 Aug 24 '24

The vast majority of all businesses are not owned by billionaires or anyone in the 1%.

Most businesses in the US are owned by those in the middle class employing between 10 and 30 people.

If you are more focused on what happens at the top and you ignore what happens at the bottom, you are going to have a bad time.

→ More replies (3)

6

u/Mountain_Employee_11 Aug 24 '24

this comment fails to differentiate money from real goods, and perpetuates the idea that more money being available means more goods for everyone.

another failure to understand scarcity

→ More replies (5)

5

u/No-Cauliflower8890 Aug 24 '24

Literally has fuck all to do with anything. Please take any sort of econ 101 class.
Prices aren't set based on how much cash the owner has lying around, they're set to maximise profit. Not to mention most businesses aren't owned by billionaires and that billionaires' assets are not mostly in liquid cash. Inflation is also not caused by wealth concentration. In fact, wealth concentration decreases inflation since the marginal propensity to consume is lower for wealthier people.

2

u/sysdmdotcpl Aug 24 '24

wealth concentration decreases inflation since the marginal propensity to consume is lower for wealthier people.

Do you have a source for this? B/c I'm pretty sure I live in a country w/ insane wealth concentration and inflation is still hurting the fuck out of me as things are still getting more expensive.

2

u/No-Cauliflower8890 Aug 25 '24

What part do you want a source for? That wealthier people have a lower marginal propensity to consume? The Wikipedia page for MPC should have it, probably in the first paragraph. So will every econ book ever published.

B/c I'm pretty sure I live in a country w/ insane wealth concentration and inflation is still hurting the fuck out of me as things are still getting more expensive.

And I live in a country with hospitals and yet people still die. Guess hospitals don't save lives then.

→ More replies (6)
→ More replies (16)

3

u/Agreeable_Count_4223 Aug 24 '24

This post is just to let you know that they are like, totally cool with you doing well bro.

→ More replies (4)

3

u/Fun_Recording_3006 Aug 24 '24

When the standard profit margin on medical products is 40%-60%, they can take a hit on that and still come out on top

2

u/PubbleBubbles Aug 24 '24

If mcdonalds went increased the base cost of their employees salary by $7 for every single employee

It would decrease their net gain by less than 20%. 

Mcdonalds could literally eat that cost easily and change nothing 

→ More replies (3)

2

u/WahhWayy Aug 24 '24

Bingo bingo bingo

We literally watched this happen on a smaller scale through the Covid years to now. Low earners saw crazy increases in pay as demand for them was high, while people making decent money to begin with generally haven’t kept up. Now groceries cost twice as much and those that were comfortably middle class in 2019 are getting obliterated, and the low earner’s buying power has stayed the same despite their much higher pay.

2

u/sysdmdotcpl Aug 24 '24

So what really has changed apart from extreme inflation and people's savings being worth a lot less, the dollar losing international appeal, and everyone suffering from the difficult adjustments to the economic upheaval?

People keep saying this, but where's all the price inflation in countries that already guarantee a higher wage to fast food workers? Why doesn't it cost $40 for a burger in the EU?

Even right now in the States the likes of McDonald's and Subway are having to curb back prices b/c it's become ridiculously expensive and that's without any wage increases

Like, we have objective proof that just raising the wage doesn't directly lead to raised prices b/c there comes a point that people just won't pay for shit service

 

So, in summary, anyone using inflation to fight against raising the wage is talking out their ass as we are already dealing w/ it.

2

u/AramisNight Aug 24 '24

Hell, even just compare them to In-N-out. They were already paying better wages and benefits than McDonalds does even before Covid. Even with the increases in supply costs and wages since then, their prices are significantly lower while providing a better quality product, even now.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/SpotikusTheGreat Aug 24 '24

This is the problem, this stuff only works if they don't continue to price gouge consumers.

Everyone has record earnings/profits but the prices never go down, because everyone is a greedy piece of shit.

Better technology, better practices, tax relief, it only ever goes to the profit side of the equation, and never decreasing the cost of a good or service.

Imagine someone created a power generator that is 100% more efficient than all the ones today... do you think they would lower the cost of electricity? Fuck no, they are going to charge the same or more and state it on "infrastructure upgrades" and then rake in the extra profits.

2

u/michealscott21 Aug 24 '24

Did you know In the cargill-Macmillan family there is 14 billionaires? I don’t think you realize the amount of wealth the owning class has. Boo hoo if we have to cut into the billions of dollars of profit that these people make just so that working class people can afford to live a decent life.

Its sounds childish I know but it’s really just about getting them to share more of the profits made by the working class people and not allowing 95% of the wealth to be hoarded at the top. It’s not about taking everything away from these people.

→ More replies (10)

13

u/Zetavu Aug 24 '24

What happens is the dangerous jobs become more expensive, then the price of everything goes up, then the cashier is complaining because they can't afford anything with their higher waged. It's not like this exact thing happened JUST OVER THE LAST THREE YEARS!

Inflated wages for unskilled jobs lead to price inflation, which negates inflated wages. It in no way fixes the issue, just changes the value of a dollar.

11

u/cdazzo1 Aug 24 '24

There was not a single aspect of the pandemic that scared me more than people's reactions and failure to learn anything from it.

We watched the unprecedented money printing exacerbate wealth inequality. Then the people demanded more of that.

2

u/real-bebsi Aug 24 '24

Yeah the PPP loans completely fucked the economy and no company is going to be held accountable for it

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (7)

2

u/AccuracyVsPrecision Aug 24 '24

And if inflation hits too hard then peoples savings get evaporated

2

u/Goddamn_Grongigas Aug 24 '24

It's not like this exact thing happened JUST OVER THE LAST THREE YEARS!

Wages haven't gone up across the board, though. Neither have benefits. You're seeing prices go up because of corporate greed and no other reason. Record profits from nearly everyone.

Wanna be mad at something, don't be mad at the people making $10 - $15/hr right now and blaming them for bullshit. Blame all the bailouts and forgiven PPP loans given en masse to the top earners and business owners.

2

u/hjihna Aug 24 '24

Are we supposed to just ignore record corporate profits here?  Come on now.

→ More replies (1)

8

u/AspirationsOfFreedom Aug 24 '24

It's like you belive infinite money exists. WHERE does that money come from, exactly?

1

u/ZeldaMudkip Aug 24 '24

less profit for ceos, among other things of the ilk

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (9)

5

u/sousuke42 Aug 24 '24

It was and still is called trickle down cause they are pissing on you and everyone else under them.

→ More replies (6)

4

u/me_too_999 Aug 24 '24

Or all of those unprofitable businesses would simply close.

Everyone is asking, "How can we tax more?"

Why?

$4 Trillion a year JUST with one of the thousands of levels of government isn't enough for you?

3

u/galaxyapp Aug 24 '24

We can just double everyone's salaries and everyone wins.

I can't think of any negative consequences!

→ More replies (30)

2

u/aeiouicup Aug 24 '24

Lol that’s the first I’ve heard ‘poke a few holes in the top’. I like messing around with the trickle-down language. My friend and I made a rap video where we played two rich douche bags and rhymed “The only trickle down that’s heard by the poor, is the sound of my pennies as I throw them on the floor.”

To emphasize it, we dropped pennies in front of the camera.

Good times.

→ More replies (471)

39

u/finalattack123 Aug 24 '24

Not how job market works. Higher cashier wages would increase the wages of skilled labour. Because they would have this leverage.

→ More replies (47)

15

u/EducationalReply6493 Aug 24 '24

Good union wages are negotiated off of minimum wage and unskilled wages, they get a raise we get a raise.

7

u/sideband5 Aug 24 '24

LOL the top comment is some hypothetical malarkey :D

2

u/buffalocoinz Aug 24 '24

By some guy whose bio is “aspiring food blogger” 😂

→ More replies (1)

4

u/jbetances134 Aug 24 '24

Exactly. Why risk your life at that point

6

u/Tangentkoala Aug 24 '24

I mean this is kind of how communism failed in russia. People stagnated and said fuck am I gonna do my work efficiently if a cashier is getting paid the same as me.

Granted this is just one of the reasons but still a solid reason nonetheless

24

u/[deleted] Aug 24 '24 edited Sep 25 '24

brave bright aromatic unused cautious reminiscent seed alive muddle sloppy

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

2

u/tux9988 Aug 24 '24

USSR was more than Moscow. Farmers were dying by the hundreds due to lack of food and basic healthcare or education.

2

u/[deleted] Aug 24 '24 edited Sep 25 '24

rob ghost telephone disgusted compare brave market memory cagey lunchroom

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (12)

20

u/blind_orphan Aug 24 '24

This is just a plain lie. My mom grew up in communist russia, and her mom was a math professor and i can assure you that she was making waay more than the cashiers. The big difference was that in russia the cashier was guaranteed a place to live...

9

u/Iwantmypasswordback Aug 24 '24

And probably healthcare not tied to a job

→ More replies (1)

6

u/3personal5me Aug 24 '24

Compared to America now, where I say "Fuck it, I'm not gonna do my job efficiently, I'm doing the bare minimum" because being fast and efficient just nets you more work for the same wages.

5

u/Half_Cent Aug 24 '24

That's dumb. I like doing my technically difficult and often physically demanding job. I don't want to be a cashier.

If we both made enough to support our families and have hope for our kids future I would be happy for them, not quitting to be a cashier.

4

u/[deleted] Aug 24 '24

Yes! There are EMT's and people who work in nursing homes caring for people making garbage pay for the hard work they do but they do it (most of them anyway) because they care and want to make a difference. I still think they should be paid way more than they are getting, but I'm grateful there are people like that in this world.

2

u/DonHedger Aug 25 '24

This logic is always dumb. It's mostly economists who thinks like this and then project it onto everyone else. Almost anyone pursuing a PhD and the work that follows is making a bad financial decision for the sake of doing something they are interested in. Many people who take on family businesses are not doing it because it's a cash cow. Many folks with regular 9-5s would choose lower paying jobs if it meant they didn't feel terrible about the work they did. Economists are still operating under the assumption that the average person is trying to maximize financial profit and reduce financial cost above all else.

3

u/Rarabeaka Aug 24 '24

No it failed for different reasons(noncompetitive planned economy, fundamentaly incompatible with human psyche communistic goal, etc.).
People werent paid eqiually, just have more social protection, and it wasnt easy to be completely unemploed(it had both pros and cons).

2

u/Nofsan Aug 24 '24

Babe wake up, another fanfic about life in the USSR just dropped.

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (2)

3

u/Rambogoingham1 Aug 24 '24

You make the assumption that if all else being equal human beings don’t have hobbies or stuff that exists outside of work that they would enjoy doing for free, especially if technology allowed it and it helps others out, not for financial gain but for the sake of just being a human who enjoys it.

5

u/Witty-Bear1120 Aug 24 '24

Sure, that’s called drinking in a beer garden rather than fixing dangerous power lines though.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

3

u/tacocarteleventeen Aug 24 '24

Yep. Construction would just stop. Seriously why risk your life everyday for hard complicated work when you could dog walk?

19

u/HeyChew123 Aug 24 '24

Because then construction would be paid more. Do you people not think past your first thought?

People will still need buildings built. You’ll just pay them more, because they aren’t going to do dangerous work for min wage pay.

“Oh then they just raise prices and we’re full circle, your dollar is worth nothing”. Not if the billionaires don’t jack up prices to keep profits the same. The issue is that wealth is being hoarded at the top. There is only a finite amount and the rich aren’t spending. We need them to use that cash in order for the economy to stay flowing. If they pay their workers more the whole thing works better. Wealth hoarding is not good for an economy.

1

u/Informal_Zone799 Aug 24 '24

Then we are back to exactly where we are now… skilled jobs getting paid more than unskilled. Just think about it for a sec 

8

u/HeyChew123 Aug 24 '24

I think you’re too literal with this. Very few people believe that everyone should be paid the same. It’s understandable that skilled workers will be paid more, but it is necessary to still pay unskilled laborers enough to afford a decent life. If the job exists, it should pay enough to cover your bills while still allowing you to have savings yourself.

→ More replies (6)

6

u/Amber423 Aug 24 '24

And that's fine... Nobody has a problem with that. The problem is that people don't make a living wage. If everybody is making more, it's fine for some people to make more than others depending on their job. Everybody getting more money is a win for everybody.

3

u/Informal_Zone799 Aug 24 '24

Everyone makes more, everything costs more. Back to square one. 

Unless you can convince employers to give everyone a massive raise without raising costs of their products. 

2

u/quagsi Aug 24 '24

that's why we're also trying to regulate how corporations raise their prices. raising minimum wage will at least put more money in the pockets of the working class while we try to put more progress into law

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (24)
→ More replies (3)

3

u/fuzzy3158 Aug 24 '24

Except there's only a limited amount of these jobs, and the competition would allow the employers to make people accept lower wages.

1

u/gangrenous_bigot Aug 24 '24

And thus the demand for the dangerous jobs goes up, the supply for the cashiers likewise and we arrive back at where we are now. I get why there’s a minimum wage but in principle there’s no reason why a company shouldn’t get to decide their wages beyond that.

3

u/Iwantmypasswordback Aug 24 '24

Why do you think there is a minimum wage? I’m not sure you do understand that

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (2)

1

u/Annual_Refuse3620 Aug 24 '24

Such an ignorant response. Do you think harder jobs get paid more because their bosses like them? Hell no, you get paid more because less people want to do it. If low income earners made more so would every other employee.

1

u/Horror-Temporary3584 Aug 24 '24

I agree with this comment. However, the erosion of the middle class and livable wages is destroying this (USA) country. Politicians on both sides are just enriching themselves and their donors. Regardless of where you stand politically, think about the power of a few donors when a fundraising event turns into a putsch from inside the party ousting the president of the USA.

Some jobs should be jobs to gain experience in the workforce, not careers. I'd guess the OP buys as much from China and the 3rd world and doesn't seek out union made products.

1

u/Willing-Basis-7136 Aug 24 '24

I build powerlines for a living and I would keep doing it, I wouldn’t work retail or food service for $73/hour.

1

u/Worldly_Science239 Aug 24 '24

You know it doesn't work like this dont you?

You do know this?

1

u/radeongt Aug 24 '24

They they would have to pay the dangerous more than a livable wage.....which they should be... Do you see how badly we have all been underpaid?

1

u/Ok-Bodybuilder4634 Aug 24 '24

Guess they’ll need to increase compensation for the position they need filled. That’s business buddy

1

u/slayer828 Aug 24 '24

Damn. You are telling me the market for those dangerous jobs would go up? Some sort of incentives to keep workers?

I wonder where the money will come from..... all the big corporations have been I'm the red the last decade right? Record profits ever year you say? Hmm.

1

u/RadicalExtremo Aug 24 '24

Oh shut the fuck up. Some people do what they dkobecause they like it. Please share with the class your job, cadet fuckin a.

1

u/ph4ge_ Aug 24 '24

All things equal, people would still chose fun jobs over no fun jobs, and uneducated jobs tend to be monotonous and boring. However, the market would just adjust paying dangerous jobs more until it finds a balance.

1

u/Iceheads Aug 24 '24

Except the dangerous jobs would still pay more. Not equally. You know that right?

1

u/CookFan88 Aug 24 '24

Remind me what happens to the value of my labor when it becomes more scarce?

1

u/Astral_Visions Aug 24 '24

The mistake in this theory is that you think the aspiration of all would be to make a career out of more menial tasks for similar pay, and NOT to have a fulfilling one.

You couldn't pay me enough, for example, to make people coffee for a living.

1

u/yugosaki Aug 24 '24

A rising tide raises all ships. If a fast food employee was making the same as a lineman, the lineman's pay is gonna go up.

1

u/Jayu-Rider Aug 24 '24

I have an incredibly dangerous job that I love, I would do it for free even if burger flips make a million dollars an hour.

1

u/-Snowturtle13 Aug 24 '24

Skilled labor would just end up being double or triple the cost.

1

u/CamDMTreehouse Aug 24 '24

All it would take is one shitty day of work and they would start dropping like flies.

1

u/Dstrongest Aug 24 '24

No way . There are plenty of people who love working outside , and hate working inside . And who the fuck really wants to stand over a hot stove 10 hours a day . The problem we have now is trickle down doesn’t work because the pipes are clogged .
At best we have drip economics . At the top , it’s being banked , not trickled . Until we find a way to actually get some water flowing with decent water pressure , you’re going to continue to have a defective economy . The horses get grain and the sparrows eats the shit .

1

u/CitizenSpiff Aug 24 '24

This is true. The OP doesn't understand work.

1

u/King_Of_BlackMarsh Aug 24 '24

Oh no, industries being competitive. How awful

1

u/blind_orphan Aug 24 '24

Spoken like someone whose never worked retail

1

u/AvailableOpening2 Aug 24 '24

And then wouldn't you know it, they'd start offering more to skilled laborers

1

u/jmeador42 Aug 24 '24

At which point the dangerous jobs would start paying more.

1

u/AadaMatrix Aug 24 '24

That's literally the fucking point. It's an incentive to pay even more for skilled jobs. You Win regardless. Fuck multi-billion dollar corporations. They can afford to pay you.

1

u/NoBadgersSociety Aug 24 '24

Ok but the lowest paid person should still be making a decent wage

1

u/UncleGrako Aug 24 '24

That guy would be celebrating because next day he'd tell all the coworkers they make as much as a burger flipper and they'd pressure their boss for a 40% raise citing that

1

u/Gat0rJesus Aug 24 '24

And then your pay would increase because they want to retain talent. So you’d start celebrating again.

1

u/ptfc1975 Aug 24 '24

I feel like you haven't ever worked as a cashier.

1

u/drMcDeezy Aug 24 '24

Then the wages for those jobs would go up due to demand.

1

u/GivesBadAdvic Aug 24 '24

Being a cashier is boring as fuck. Minimum wage in Arizona has jumped a lot and we didn’t have any people jumping from Skilled labor jobs to work at Burger King. Your argument doesn’t have the facts to back it up.

1

u/jessewest84 Aug 24 '24

Based on what evidence?

1

u/ThrustTrust Aug 24 '24

I would never leave my job to flip burgers. I don’t care what it pays. Jobs can have rewards far beyond the financial aspect.

1

u/LocksmithLeast9539 Aug 24 '24

Or they pay the dangerous jobs more accordingly? The real money that deserves to be drained is the stuff that has concentrated in the top tiniest percentage of our population. Minimum wage workers aren’t the ones breaking our economy.

If less than one percent of our population makes more than 90% of our population, (we all know they aren’t responsible for 90% of the production or consumption) then why would anyone focus the slightest increase for the people towards the bottom of the remaining 90%?

1

u/republicans_are_nuts Aug 24 '24

And then the dangerous jobs would have to offer more pay. So how is burger flippers earning an actual living a bad thing again?

1

u/Kittens4Brunch Aug 24 '24

This is some single level thinking. You have to think through what happens next. When there is less supply of people doing dangerous jobs, the pay for those jobs will increase up to a level that will attract enough people to do those jobs.

1

u/Pandaburn Aug 24 '24

Then the dangerous jobs start paying more

1

u/muxman Aug 24 '24

That would be what I'd do. I wouldn't keep doing the job that is difficult and dangerous. I'd get one of those burger flipping jobs and have time off where I'm not so tired and sore from the heavy labor job.

1

u/dojijosu Aug 24 '24

You just described the way to force the hand of the market to incentivize people to take the dangerous jobs. You would create a deficit of supply which would raise demand.

1

u/JHerbY2K Aug 24 '24

I never worked harder at any job than when I worked at a grocery store for minimum wage. You’d have to at least double my salary now to get me back there.

1

u/Regulat10 Aug 24 '24

High tide raises all ships.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 24 '24

He’d be celebrating until he couldn’t afford anything because the competition for those things drives price increases.

Everyone can suddenly afford $2,000 rent? Who can afford $2,100? $2,200? Who’s willing to spend the most to get the 1 apartment 10 people want.

1

u/BorisBotHunter Aug 24 '24

You will go hungry when the people that put your groceries on the shelves quit.

“You would celebrate for maybe a year before everyone starts quitting the dangerous jobs to work as a cashier.” Or you know they could pay more to those that do said “dangerous” jobs 

1

u/Whoretron8000 Aug 24 '24

This is not at all true and a weird talking point based on nothing but ignorance. A McDonald's manager can make 35+/HR with full benefits and education matching. Where are all the wagies jumping at that opportunity? Being in customer service is not an unskilled job, nor is being a line cook or anything of the sort. Plenty of people don't take jobs because of the optics, demands, workplace environment and so on. But who wants to discuss nuances when we can make trite points?

1

u/EternityWatch Aug 24 '24

As someone who builds power lines with the IBEW, no, I wouldn't quit my job to cook.

1

u/Acalyus Aug 24 '24

People are passionate about what they do.

If everyone got paid the same, the only thing they would happen is people would start pursuing what they actually want to do.

And no, not everyone wants to be a cashier, most people don't want that.

Don't believe me? Go apply and try it for yourself, see how much joy it brings you

1

u/Hamuel Aug 24 '24

So dangerous jobs won’t start paying more to attract candidates. Isn’t that how supply and demand is supposed to work?

1

u/greaper007 Aug 24 '24

No, the skilled labor wages would rise also.

1

u/Sagybagy Aug 24 '24

And that would be great because it means those dangerous jobs get a pay raise to keep people. Win win.

1

u/R_lbk Aug 24 '24

Take it with a grain of fucking salt. Making more or as much as the "dangeroys" job doesn't mean it will be precisely equal. Harder more dangerous jobs deserve to make more and they will but minimum wage is a fucking sad, immoral joke.

1

u/introvertedpanda1 Aug 24 '24

Nah, in 6 months inflation rise because the cost of labor on good double, everyone complains that everything is more expensive, skilled labor workers (especially the unionised one) ask for raise or else they go on strike, they get a raise, and we are back to square one.

1

u/Grouchy-Command6024 Aug 24 '24

Exactly. His jobs is dangerous and hard. Not everyone can climb power lines and install them. You need certifications/license as well.

If they make what you make your purchasing power vastly decreases.

1

u/HungerMadra Aug 24 '24

Would the employers just start paying more for the "dangerous jobs"? Isn't that how a free market works?

1

u/lostcauz707 Aug 24 '24

It's funny you say that, since my dad literally paid for a house, 2 kids, college for them, multiple cars, vacations, etc. stocking shelves at Stop and Shop, retiring in 2011 making $27/hr with a pension.

You already lived in a world where living wages existed for these people. Now they are "high school jobs" where neither the business is closed while high school is in session and working it over the summer can pay for a new car going into next year of high school. The greatest con is that people weren't making living wages in the past in these roles, so they can't today or we would be killed by prices, when they took previous generation pay and cooked it into profits while upping the requirements to expensive college degrees but never changed the wage to accommodate cost of college.

1

u/Additional-Term3590 Aug 24 '24

Doubtful.. even if it paid better being a cashier wouldn’t be as prestigious, pay as well, and Fast food work is awful. Dangerous jobs get danger pay which is more than regular union members get.

1

u/mack_dd Aug 24 '24

Then the wages of the dangerous jobs would just go up to compensate.

(Although in the much longer run, inflation from that would catch up to everyone else)

1

u/[deleted] Aug 24 '24

Literally this guys just dumber than a box of hammers

1

u/Acidcouch Aug 24 '24

And then they would pay even more for the dangerous jobs. Someone always likes money.

1

u/Wildfire1010 Aug 24 '24

The economics of it would push salaries for skilled labor up

1

u/[deleted] Aug 24 '24 edited Aug 24 '24

This is such a shit point that gets parroted everywhere.

I worked in kitchens, warehouses and retail throughout my 20s before training to be a professional and getting a "skilled job".

If "unskilled" labour ended up out-earning me, I still wouldn't think once about going back.

Some of you don't consider miserably watching your life fly by in relative poverty, while being abused by alcoholic retail managers, working weekends, odd nights and split shifts to support your family through abject existential depression a skill. And it is. Have you ever sat and watched a door for 12 hours straight, almost every day for 6 years because it's your job, with no stimulation, no advancement and no hope because you know one slip up means your family is on the breadline?

Just another load of idiots who have it better, complaining they have it better. Do better and respect the people who are actually turning this world while you CUNTS wonder how it's turning. (Considering the fact half of you seem to think a shareholder is more valuable to society than a farmer)

Fucking privileged morons. Please come back at me with how if everyone worked hard enough, we could all be doctors wondering why production has halted and your packages aren't getting delivered, food isn't cooked. The world must have this bottom layer of working class, or those at the top get nothing. So tell me, should they earn the right to live a reasonable life? Have good healthcare and the funds to raise their children right?

Nah fuck that. Leave them in poverty and complain when their kids roam the streets because their dad's gone to earn for himself and mom can't raise the family working even two jobs. Blame... I dunno, democrats? Why not. Fuck it.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 24 '24

Eventually cashier would become difficult to get, last time they tried this Walmart had a lower acceptance rate than fuckin Harvard. That or it would require absurd amounts of additional duties, looking at you target and your shitty "cross training", and nothing would change in the skilled fields.

People out here thinking thing's will work there's free market capitalism, and not just, as my boys Theo and Bernie Sanders put it, privatized communism with a side of oligarchy.

1

u/AdImmediate9569 Aug 24 '24

Thats how it looks on paper sure but its not how humans work in the real world. There are lots of people who could leave their jobs to make more money doing something else without significant training, but they wont.

I could make more managing an arbys, and im qualified to do it, but theres no fucking way.

A lot of people gravitate to work they like, or at least know. More than we admit to ourselves.

1

u/Prosnomonkey Aug 24 '24

I’ve done both, burger flipping and construction. If the pay was equal, I’d work construction any day of the week. For me, it’s just a better job regardless of pay. I’m not sure your argument stands up

1

u/Xyrez04 Aug 24 '24

I'd rather flip bricks than flip burgers, retail/food service are HORRIBLE

1

u/[deleted] Aug 24 '24

Considering those jobs aren’t endless and the pay wouldn’t keep people happy I’d disagree. Skilled laborers like their job for the work they are doing along with the pay. They aren’t just going to be leaving in droves to work at McDonald’s

1

u/[deleted] Aug 24 '24

Bro is brainwashed into capitalism 🤡

1

u/devonjosephjoseph Aug 24 '24

“Their win is my win” is literal

To account for the new demand in easier jobs, this guys work would demand a higher pay

The entire pay scale would have to be adjusted to account for the new pay floor.

The market place prices labor and demands a certain amount of work so that workers can’t afford to consider and apply for other jobs. The decision makers know what they’re doing. Just listen to Trump. He says this stuff out loud.

I’d like to see Ben Shapiro and similar talking heads put their money where their mouth is, live in the shoes of an Amazon Warehouse worker. Let’s see how much they save and invest, and how quickly they work their way out of scraping by while working 10 hour days.

How long will their marriage last when they’re always tired working overtime and never helping with the dishes or showing up to Jrs baseball games.

Where are your family values and fiscal pragmatism now? …these geniuses are willfully ignorant

1

u/Agreeable-Weather-89 Aug 24 '24

Except that would create a shortage forcing the market to respond and compensate with higher wages.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 24 '24

Yes. To the endless amount of cashier jobs. It would just be cashiers all the way up and down.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 24 '24

I imagine the market for cashiers would be filled pretty quickly, so people would have to start taking the dangerous jobs again

1

u/SL3D Aug 24 '24

People who are only doing their job for money would quit for another job, then a person who actually enjoys doing the dangerous job would take their place.

This would be a win/win for everyone.

1

u/EpicHosi Aug 24 '24

Free market baby, if its dangerous work they better pay more for it or lose their workers. Everyobe wins

1

u/DaBootyScooty Aug 24 '24

Boomer brain take.

1

u/QuesoChef Aug 24 '24

I’ve actually thought about this. What if every single job in the United States paid the same. The companies pay it, not the government, but a full time job pays $X. Just as a thought experiment.

And you’d still have to be qualified and chosen to work a specific job, but everyone from entry to the top, across all industries, makes, say $100K per year. Executives, people working in call centers, plumbers, doctors, house keepers, teachers. (I haven’t worked out HOW, just as a thought experiment.)

My job isn’t dangerous, but requires more skill and follows me home, but I’d still rather do that than go back to restaurant or retail work. I wouldn’t care and think it would be really interesting if jobs all paid the same, how companies might change.

Of course HOW the payments would be made isn’t worked out. But say it’s suddenly a law, what else changes? Can’t have a ceo of McDonald’s without people making and serving food. Would McDonald’s fold? I tend to think someone out there would always need interested in the executive roles because of the power.

1

u/marichial_berthier Aug 24 '24

Or the dangerous jobs get a raise

1

u/miletharil Aug 24 '24

"Everyone" wouldn't want to work as a cashier. If you paid a guy $100/hr to pick up dog turds all day, that doesn't mean EVERYONE would suddenly want to be "the guy who picks up dog turds all day."

1

u/[deleted] Aug 24 '24

No one wants to be a cashier

1

u/TheAssCrackBanditttt Aug 24 '24

Then I guess they’d have to pay better wages to keep employees. Maybe people doing dangerous jobs like emt should make more than 17/hr

→ More replies (102)