• Bamboodpanda@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    20 days ago

    If fast-food workers began earning wages comparable to electricians, I wouldn’t necessarily expect electricians to become poorer. I’d expect employers who depend on skilled labor to increase compensation to remain competitive. The question then becomes whether those higher labor costs come from reduced profits, increased prices, greater productivity, or some combination of all three.

    Anyway, it is better for all workers.

    • lime!@feddit.nu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      20 days ago

      what you’d actually see is increased unemployment, because that’s the most effective regulator of salaries. the system requires a mass of people without jobs in order to balance itself.

      • ඞmir@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        19 days ago

        the system requires a mass of people without jobs in order to balance itself.

        I don’t know where you got this idea, it seems more like the system requires desperate people and lack of jobs does help in causing that. However, fuck the system

        • lime!@feddit.nu
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          19 days ago

          it’s pretty simple; given offers of two identical jobs with different benefits, you’d pick the better one. if there isn’t enough people to fill all open positions, employers need to compete by raising benefits. in short, price follows demand. the more people that are looking for jobs, the lower employers can push salaries and still hire someone.

          when neolibs campaign on how “everyone should have a job” and use that as an excuse to cut unemployment benefits, that’s them trying to distract from the fact that unemployment is necessary for the system they built to function. as unemployment approaches zero, salaries approach infinity.

          so yeah, fuck that system.

      • Lyrl@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        15 days ago

        A few percent of job seekers as structural unemployment supports a healthy economy where people change jobs and careers to match changes in labor needs.

        That doesn’t mean an increase in minimum wage increases unemployment. There are hundreds of academic studies investigating that question, and it seems the increased economic activity of low-income people having more money generates enough new jobs to at least balance whatever job cuts happen due to the higher labor costs (low-income people tend to spend all their money, so they are more effective agents of short term economic stimulus than higher-income households that tend to save some of it).

        • lime!@feddit.nu
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          15 days ago

          i was more thinking the other way round, that an increase in unemployment decreases wages.

          • Lyrl@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            15 days ago

            Increased unemployment can lead to decreased wages, depending on other factors. I had read your post above as claiming a multipart chain of higher minimum wage -> increased unemployment -> decreased wages, and my post was intended to address the first link (higher minimum wage -> increased unemployment), not the second.

            • lime!@feddit.nu
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              14 days ago

              i don’t think i even made the first claim, at least i didn’t intend to.