What should jobs pay?

[specsaregood]

People don't create jobs or hire people to better the lives of employees, they hire people because they need help, becuse they want to make more money. Upward mobility is your own responsibility, and your choice.

I've hired people based primarily on them needing some help bettering their lives -- usually friends or friends of friends. Not every time was it to make more money nor because I absolutely needed the help.

 

[tod evans]

I've hired people based primarily on them needing some help bettering their lives -- usually friends or friends of friends. Not every time was it to make more money nor because I absolutely needed the help.

A very altruistic approach to hiring that requires a financial independance I've not experienced..

Good on you!

 

[PRB]

I think most of us see the current prosperity (compared with a century ago) as quite amazing considering we have had to deal with a century of an ever increasing government, taxes, and wealth transfers (inflation).

Somehow you just know this wasn't the result of market demand. People neither vote nor bought the government they wanted?

 

[PRB]

I've hired people based primarily on them needing some help bettering their lives -- usually friends or friends of friends. Not every time was it to make more money nor because I absolutely needed the help.

it's nice of you to do that, but do you admit your example is an exception rather than rule?

 

[PRB]

Yeah, but you look at the sci fi shit we have today, then look at the fact that most people who were around to see it will tell you that they were better off thirty or forty years ago during the VCR and cassette tape age, and it doesn't make a bit of sense--until you take a hard look at what tptb has been up to the while.

you're right, it makes no sense at all. Why would anybody think life was better 40 years ago? I'd love to know how they're measuring it.

 

[specsaregood]

A very altruistic approach to hiring that requires a financial independance I've not experienced..
Good on you!

I'm not saying it was always for a lot of money or always fulltime. But if somebody I know needs money and I'm doing well at the time... there is always extra work to be found. QA work has always been a role I could fit somebody into with little to no training and not expensive.

it's nice of you to do that, but do you admit your example is an exception rather than rule?

perhaps, I'm just following the examples I was given growing up though. I don't think its all that rare. I might be inclined to agree if you added the part in bold:

People don't create jobs or hire people to better the lives of employees, they hire people because they need help, because they want to make more money OR they want to improve the quality of their own lives

Why do people hire others to mow their lawn, babysit their kids, rake their leaves, do their oil change, hire a maid, and a large number of similar chores? Its not to make more money and its not usually because they absolutely need somebody else to do those things.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

I don't get the purpose of this discussion. Zippy is leading us into a discussion that is, fundamentally, more about morality and philosophy than economics. It makes no difference what we want if we are powerless to change it. So blanket statements like "we need more ____" are just reflections of a personal situation from somebody who happens to need that.

As long as we can get the government to stop trying to "fix" things, then I am fairly certain that the economy would do just fine without it. Why are we even worried about unemployment numbers and what wages are? If the government were not involved, then unemployment would not matter nearly as much because there would be no central planner to which that figure represented something. Wages would also be less of a discussion because they would, first of all, probably be higher due to the lack of taxes and restricting regulations. People wouldn't go around worrying about comparing their wages to some fictional "minimum" and superfluous discussions about how to "create jobs" would be non-existent.

Instead we are living in a fantasy world where what we want is just one magic arm of government away from being achieved through some sort of government action. In a free market economy, such superfluous debates would not take place and reality would be far more present than it is now. What a job should pay is a question for people who wish for the market to be manipulated. If that wasn't their goal, then they would not be taking place in such discussions.

Higher paying jobs would likely result in higher prices, but only within a certain framework of government manipulation. If we cling to the current model, then nothing will get better whether "we" (there's that word again) were to raise wages or lower them. Only if we step outside of the current government framework can we truly have a discussion about cause-and-effect because that is the only position from which we can base our discussion on reality instead of speculations about how "things would be different if I ran the country." That said, we can't know what effect any change in wages would have if we were to abandon the framework of government control. It could quite possibly accompany a drop in prices. We just don't know and we can't say what would happen if we only operate within this framework like Zippy seems to be.

 

[acptulsa]

you're right, it makes no sense at all. Why would anybody think life was better 40 years ago? I'd love to know how they're measuring it.

A single breadwinner could still support a middle class family without having inside information, having blackmail material on the mayor, or working ninety hours a week.

 

[PRB]

A single breadwinner could still support a middle class family without having inside information, having blackmail material on the mayor, or working ninety hours a week.

As far as I can tell, single breadwinner families still get by, whether they are considered middle class depends on your definition. Those who say they cant' get by or survive on one income, I'm confident to say they're bad at spending decisions (which exceptions such as those with extreme medical costs, and I'm not sure if those people were better off 40 years ago).

 

[PaulStandsTall]

In a world where people are able to interact voluntarily with another without a political class butting in and taxing our productivity for their own coffers to finance wars, domestic espionage, secret courts, and bridges to nowhere,jobs should pay whatever is agreed upon by the people involved.

We don't live in that world.

 

[brandon]

Responding to one point in OP. Swithing jobs within the same industry doesnt mean you start over again from entry level or take a pay hit. I actually just switched job last week and got a good size increase in pay. Fwiw im im the private sector and have found the pay to be very fair. There are good jobs out there if you are willing to work to get them.

 

[brandon]

Ill also add my public company has quarterly profit sharing. All employees from the bottom up get quarterly bonuses tied to the performance of the company as a whole.

 

[Danke]

(mod delete)

 

[PRB]

Responding to one point in OP. Swithing jobs within the same industry doesnt mean you start over again from entry level or take a pay hit.

That assumes your company doesn't have a non-competition policy.

I actually just switched job last week and got a good size increase in pay. Fwiw im im the private sector and have found the pay to be very fair. There are good jobs out there if you are willing to work to get them.

Do you have a degree?

 

[brandon]

I do have a degree, that I acquired cheaply. I have non degreed friends that also have well paying jobs with skills that would transfer. For example, one guy is a lineman, switches jobs every year, and makes close to 6 figures. Another guy is a restaurant general manager and could probably switch if he needed too. He makes enough to support a family of 4 as the only income earner.

I know sometimes it can seem like there are no jobs out there but from my experience there definitely are jobs for people with and without degrees that pay "living wages", they just require a few years of hard work at the lower pay levels before you move up to more senior roles.