Slashdot Mirror
In This Economy, Quitters Are Winning (wsj.com)
An anonymous reader shares a report: Workers are choosing to leave their jobs at the fastest rate since the internet boom 17 years ago and getting rewarded for it with bigger paychecks and/or more satisfying work. Labor Department data show that 3.4 million Americans quit their jobs in April, near a 2001 peak and twice the 1.7 million who were laid off from jobs in April. Job-hopping is happening across industries including retail, food service and construction, a sign of broad-based labor-market dynamism. Workers have been made more confident by a strong economy and historically low unemployment, at 3.8% in May, the lowest since 2000. Ms. Enoch started getting interview opportunities the same day she began sending out applications online. The trend could stoke broader wage growth and improve worker productivity, which have been sluggish in the past decade. Workers tend to get their biggest wage increases when they move from one job to another. Job-switchers saw roughly 30% larger annual pay increases in May than those who stayed put over the past 12 months, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta.
I quit my last job where I'd been for 14 years for stability; however, we were acquired 4 times in 3 years.
The last acquisition was by a company that hadn't given at least some staff pay rises for 8 years. That doesn't make you think they're too worried about shedding staff.
My department manager walked back a raise promised after my review.
I ended up moving to another department who needed help and asked for the same raise.
Employers and managers are just out of touch and assume most people are just too lazy and comfortable like them and won't move around.
Well, why is that surprising?
American companies are known for exploiting their employees, treating them like shit, paying them as low as they can, and firing them as soon as they can. I, for a change, have job that I'm unlikely to leave any time soon. Why? Because they're paying me a very good salary, and they're treating me very well. They see the human part in their employees, unlike Americans who see their employees as disposable machines. I don't work in the USA, but I used to work for 2 American companies. Now I work for a Scandinavian company, and I love it.
Locations with high levels of job hopping tend to be more productive and prosperous than locations with more stability. Job hoppers spread ideas. Freedom to quit and freedom to fire mean that unproductive and unhappy people are more likely to go where they are a better fit.
Churn is good.
So lower unemployment, lower taxes, and "30% larger annual pay increases" for people changing jobs is a bad thing?
Seriously 'Quitter'? These are just people changing jobs; never mind the ones that were laid off or fired. I guess it's too much in the eyes of WSJ to let the peons change their allegiance. I guess they'd prefer the slave workers to keep working until the same place until they die; without raise. Since this is 4th of July, I give a big FU to WSJ and hooray for some independence and dignity for the average worker.
A job is something you stay at. Long term benefits traded for long term benefits on both sides, including protection.
A gig is short term. A stepping stone. You don't stand for long on any individual stepping stone. Great upside in a rising economy, with a potential downside when the economy falters. There's still a trade of benefits. That part doesn't change.
Both can be called careers. That's the personal development side. Beware however, employees and employers both. You reap what you sow.
Having income growth levels of 3.25% vs 2.5% (30% more) while the rich double and triple their income doesn't solve the problem.
Our issue is not what any other country is taking from us and not what the government is taking from us. Those are just distractions thrown at us by the people getting rich off of the real issue.
Our issue is the larger and larger piece of the pie going to the few while the lower income bracket has steadily grown since 1980ish. We are no longer the country of opportunity for all. Many others have higher percentage chances for people to move up from the income bracket they were born in than America today.
We need a change that restores respect to real work. The hardest workers in America typically get paid the least, and that is not right. The growth in the service industry only exacerbates the problem. People don't respect those mowing the grass or changing their oil when they have never, even in their childhood, gotten off of their fat asses and mowed their own grass or changed their own oil.
The most critical aspect of the days when America was allegedly great is that the typical upper-level executive in a company made about 300% more than the lowest worker on the factory floor - not 3,000% or more.
It's you.
Try not being you. It might help.
In any economy, winners are able to quit.
I know dozens of people stuck at dead end jobs because they can't go 90-180 days w/o health care. Only the top tier stuff has day 1 health care. This is one of the big reasons I want single payer in America (besides that it saves $17 trillion over the next 10 years. Seriously, we could pay off the National Debt in my lifetime). Wanna see wages go up across the board? Give everyone healthcare so they can demand higher wages. Rising tide/all boats and all that.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
American companies are known for exploiting their employees, treating them like shit
In Japan, many Japanese workers work to death.
Same thing happens in Korea, Taiwan and China.
In Bangladesh, workers are routinely locked inside the building they work in and many had been burned to death when fire broke out.
In India, employers have been known to beat their workers to death.
If you are thinking that only American companies treating their employees like shit, please wake the fuck up and smell the coffee.
All companies are alike. To the bosses, their workers are slaves , to be worked to death, without pity.
It actually only applies to those people whose skills are in the industry we are in, because of industry consolidation there are two employers, so those people have limited choices.
Those of us who have transferable skills (I work in IT) have been able to negotiate more. I asked for and received 10% this year, and will be asking for the same next year.
Our Warehouse manager asked for 25% and was turned down, so he left for even more than that.
There is not much our American overlords can do about wage inflation in this country.
"The trend could stoke broader wage growth and improve worker productivity, which have been sluggish in the past decade." I could give a fuck about worker productivity. It's been going up and up for a couple decades with barely any wage growth. Companies have profited immensely from workers fearing losing their job. You want real wage growth? Do like said above and decouple health insurance from business. Then people could really go find jobs worth the pay.
Who am I kitting, the history books will be written by the descendants of the rich, the rest of the people will mostly be erased from it.
Avantgarde Hebrew science fiction
Where is this gulag?
We still have a rather robust independent media in the U.S. and any hint that a sizeable percentage of American workers were being shuttled off to a gulag would be a big news item.
Yeah, because if you say otherwise you'll be sent to the gulag.
Except that the real Gulag was built by the people opposed to capitalism.
Now you sound like one of those 1%ers.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
From a well known well capitalized company and yet my income is not higher, this is another of the "ghosting" articales of how mean employees are... again, wait I have heard this before, Early 90's, not enough experience, Late 90's not 15 years exp with java, early 00's no whatever that stupid protocal with low bandwidth for modile was, mid 00's no javascript, 2010... you just don't fit with our corporate culture.. so here we are the next excuse to not hire people.
Yep, when you're at the bottom of a hole, the only way is up. BTW, are we talking quitting a job at McDonald's to get a job at Starbucks because after working at McDonald's you now have service experience?
Debate is a form of harassment. Do not question my truth.
Again, your vitriol shows that you are unwilling and unable to work with adults and that you are unable to be a productive member of society. Telling someone to go die is testament to this. There is nothing you can say from here on out that will show you have any saving virtues. Please seek psychological help.
Support your local school shooter, give them your firearms.
We're plenty sea worthy. It's just all the spoils are going to the top 1%. I'd say it's high time for mutiny.
Sounds good, who's going first?
Capitalism is not a religion. It has no supernatural beings, no miraculous claims, no songs or ceremonies, no membership rituals, and above all, no impossible-to-prove claims about the physical world.
Capitalism is the organizational model in which the means of production can be owned by private citizens (rather than all owned by the government). That isn't even analogous to a religion.
Incidentally, betrayal and greed are just as much the hallmarks of communism, which you would know if you studied your history. Adopting an arrangement where the means of production are (effectively) owned by the government doesn't eliminate greed and betrayal from human nature. It in fact makes things worse, since the organizational authorities have overwhelmingly more power than they do in a capitalistic system.
The wealthy don't earn their money. They steal it.
"Sounds good, who's going first?"
Yes.
And what's on second, I don't know's on third.
Agreed. Having any job used to be respected but gradually some sort of expectation inflation crept in.... maybe it's the push to get more people into further education ? Or the shallow materialism that permeates our culture?
I have bled brakes, changed oil, changed head gaskets, moved a lawn, planted and picked strawberries, raspberries, bunch of other fruits and veggies, prepared jams, marmalade and compotes. Made (and still make) my own cheese, yogurt, soap.
I know exactly the time and effort involved in these jobs - it is practically none. Why do you expect me to respect someone who takes 3 times as much time as needed, who does subpar job that I later have to redo? I don't complain because if the management doesn't see a problem with the quality of the work of their staff, that means management is incompetent and nothing good will come of it. I've found through trial and error good mechanics that let me inspect their work before they hand the keys back to me, or let me spend time with them in the shop. And surprisingly they charge much less that the other guys who don't know what they are doing.
There is not much our American overlords can do about wage inflation in this country.
If you look at median wage growth, though, it's pretty weak - not much wage inflation. In a tight employment market (4% unemployment), and a period of GDP growth, you'd expect more wage inflation.
This is called a "straw fire". Impressive, but only for a short time and afterwards you just have ashes. The stupid fall for it every time though.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
Today is my last day at my current job. Starting monday a new one, with 10% more salary, 9 to 5 hours instead of 9 to 6, and 4 stop commute instead of 17 on the underground. Shop around for jobs every couple of years, it can be very profitable and improve you life greatly.
The economy is actually quite strong. And it was strong for the past 6 years.
However policy is still treating it like it is in a recession and not investing into safety nets for when it drops again.
Also we are starting trade wars for no real good reason. Which the countries are responding in a more targeted attack that may not hurt the entire economy as much but the states that unwisely voted for trump.
Any country cannot fight off the entire US economy, but they can hit particular states rather hard.
They know targeting the Tech sector will mostly effect people who mostly voted for Clinton. But agriculture, Automotive... that will get the area which would hurt the idiot who started the trade war in the first place.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Part of the problem is that as a society we are getting to the stage where this so-called "real work" is being replaced by robots, and fast. So instead we should improve our education system so that people who would eventually end up mowing the lawn have a chance at doing something less menial.
"What lies behind us, and what lies before us are tiny matters compared to what lies within us." Ralph Waldo Emerson
The thing they have in common is that they are using the system to benefit themselves, and punishing people who try to change the system to be fairer to the majority. Right/left, capitalist/communist, those are just the means that worked for them at the time.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Thanks for insulting my appearance, sight unseen. I don't know why I bother to bathe every day and wear clean clothes. Thanks for insulting my skills too. I don't know why I bother to continue work on unpaid personal coding projects to keep my skills up.
I'm always irrationally optimistic during interviews. It's irrational to assume any interview will be different from every other interview. After all, every employed person is SHIT LIKE YOU, and SHIT LIKE YOU is never hiring.
The absolute worst part of being an open source coder is I'm not compensated when undeserving SHIT LIKE YOU take my hard work and use it for your own benefit.
Have you considered that I'm bitter because of SHIT LIKE YOU who are constantly lying about the existence of jobs that don't exist?
Now how about you go fuck yourself and die in a fire?
If you come across in interviews even half as bad as you do here it's no wonder no one would hire you. If your skills are so shit hot work for yourself. Flood the appstore with useless crap and rake it in that way.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
You both have a point. Unskilled "people persons" get promoted while the skilled people are forced to clean up in their wake. Strait up Dilbert shit.
Upper income bracket has also grown. Over a 10 year period, 80% of those who left the middle income went into upper income. There's a fundamental issue that in the long run only a few will create and we'll asymptotically approach 100% unemployment. Even with now with "3%" unemployment, an increasing number of economists are claiming a substantial fraction of jobs are bullshit jobs with no or negative value for the purpose of having a job. Creating jobs for the sake of jobs is a horrible reason. Basic income.
Unemployment is not down, more people have simply dropped off the tracking. If people give up and become homeless they are no longer counted on the u6, let alone the u2 unemployment index. Every president tells the same lies, and the media lets them all get away with it. I don't fully understand why, but I presume it has to do with the difficulty of explaining unemployment statistics to the public. The underemployed, those going further and further into debt and/or skipping medical care which causes eventual repercussions for both themselves and everyone else, are also not counted. And the unemployment rate also does not account for people having to work multiple jobs and unreasonably long hours to stay off the street, who cannot subsequently have any kind of life.
Repeating lies makes you a useful idiot (see Wikipedia) at best. Or maybe it just makes you a liar.
Lower taxes is also a lie, except for the rich. The average tax savings was minuscule.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
The thing they have in common is that they are using the system to benefit themselves, and punishing people who try to change the system to be fairer to the majority. Right/left, capitalist/communist, those are just the means that worked for them at the time.
Under capitalism, the rich become powerful.
Under socialism, the powerful become rich.
As you say, the top ends up looking the same either way. The problem is corruption, and humanity hasn't found the solution yet.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
When I put my resume up on Indeed a month or so ago, I got multiple contacts within 24 hours, including cold calls from recruiters who somehow had my telephone number.
That is great but that sort of response isn't the norm. In my line of work (manufacturing operations) such a vigorous response would be almost unheard of no matter how attractive your resume. I think this speaks more to industry and company culture than anything else but just posting your resume will rarely land you interviews that easily in my industry. Your mileage may vary of course. In my wife's line of work she gets calls out of the blue all the time because there simply aren't a lot of people who do what she does.
But as soon as you say "online submission" all is lost. I've never known anyone who got a call back from submitting their resume through a company web site. Perhaps it has happened somewhere in the world, but it must be quite rare.
There is a reason for that. It's because the HR folks get absolute bombarded with resumes so the odds you you actually getting a response unless you are EXACTLY what they are looking for is a good approximation of zero if the company has any size to it at all. Big companies are doing keyword searches and throwing out 99% of the resumes they actually do read. Chances are you'll get at most 30-60 seconds of consideration if you are lucky and the odds of a response are ridiculously low. Those systems are set up to weed out resumes and ward off lawsuits than they are to actually setting up interviews. You are quite right that getting a response that way will be quite unusual.
If your resume isn't attractive enough that recruiters reach out to you, that sucks.
The vast majority of people fall into that category.
At least get some help prettying up your resume, and you may need to consider moving to where your job is hot.
Sometimes it doesn't matter how "pretty" your resume is. And people often cannot move for a variety of good reasons.
This is the sentiment of a typical bigot. A bigot is someone who takes a whole category of people as a blanket statement and judges them unworthy.
There are some wealthy people who fall squarely into your category, there are some who very much earned every penny they have honestly and there is a whole range in between like. Inherited some wealth then used it. Do you really think every singer songwriter out there who becomes a mega star is a thief?
What about the person who wins the lottery then invest wisely, did they steal anything?
I have know both poor people who were bigoted against the wealthy and wealthy bigoted against poor, but honestly there are a lot of good people who fit both categories. This type of 'class warfare' is nothing but counter productive.
A better way to approach wealth discrepancy is to look for laws that 'even the playing field' for those who are underprivileged.
How about instead of a typical minimum wage, there is a law that requires some kind of profit , ( and risk ) sharing with employees.
Not that I actually advantage this specifically , but consider some of the interesting effects it would have if we simply outlawed paying people a wage and instead required each persons compensation to be tied to the previous quarters profits / income of the company. I'm not saying that is a real solution, but with some creative work, there is a real place for a win / win for both labor and owners in an arrangement like that. Labor should earn higher income, and feel more invested, owners get to share the risk because if sales tank they aren't still stuck with a labor bill. Of coarse there would have to be a lot more too it then that, like something that involved some decision making mechanism, but there are better ways to solve the problem then scream.
The rich are thieves and the poor are lazy welfare leaches.
âoeTolerance applies only to persons, but never to truth. Intolerance applies only to truth, but never to persons.
We need a change that restores respect to real work. The hardest workers in America typically get paid the least, and that is not right. The growth in the service industry only exacerbates the problem.
How do you suggest we accomplish that? Do you look for the most expensive oil change place, the most expensive grocery store, the most expensive child care?
People don't respect those mowing the grass or changing their oil when they have never, even in their childhood, gotten off of their fat asses and mowed their own grass or changed their own oil.
So you are proposing .... mandatory lawn mowing in schools?
Or just that we get off your lawn?
You really need to look a bit beyond just the pay because, if you don't, you'll be job hopping again soon enough.
How long has the company been operating ?
Are they established and stable, or a startup ?
How much turnover does the company have ? Why ?
Benefits ? Insurance ? Retirement ?
Does it require travel ?
What's the cost of living where the company wants you to move ?
Telecommute a possibility ?
Starting at bottom seniority means getting stuck with hours you hate ?
How much personal / vacation / sick time they offer ?
How many hours per week do they require ?
Personally, some of the items on the above list are MORE important to me than the pay is.
Do you really think every singer songwriter out there who becomes a mega star is a thief?
Pretty much, for the last 15 years at least.
...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
So you are proposing .... mandatory lawn mowing in schools?
Seems to be working very well for schools in Japan. Most of them have no janitors, as students are the ones performing that work.
...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
Terribly sorry, old chap, but I do believe you are deranged. SOME wealthy steal their money - and some poor steal their money. Most folks, wealthy or not, DO earn it.
You've forgotten the people of modest means who live below their means and invest their money wisely over 30 years. But wait, that goes against instant gratification so these people who denied themselves a bunch of things must have their wealth stolen, sorry, I mean they must 'share ' it.
I agree with some of this. BUT, let's use an example. You live in Omaha. You want yardwork done. Do you: Hire a legal citizen and pay $35/hour or, Hire an illegal alien and pay $10/hour. It's easy to say 'corporations should pay higher wages!' but when faced with an immediate, individual choice, most people won't make choices that cost them more money.
Considering the tax liability for people at low incomes is around 3000-5000, just the mandate alone being gone is anywhere from 1/3 to 1/5 saving on their overall tax liability for the whole year.
Selling out the future, fantastic. These people are just not going to have health care, and then we can all pay for it. Except, since we're not getting national health, we'll all overpay for it.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
If you look at median wage growth, though, it's pretty weak - not much wage inflation. In a tight employment market (4% unemployment), and a period of GDP growth, you'd expect more wage inflation.
"The current U6 unemployment rate as of May 2018 is 7.60." And let's face it, even that is a lie. The actual unemployment rate is somewhere between the U6 rate and the inverse of the labor participation rate, which is currently 37.3 — the participation rate currently being 62.7%.
Stop repeating this nonsense about 4% unemployment. It is a total falsehood.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
... the ones who know stuff have the upper hand. The ones simply juggling money are very close to being replaced by robots. Closer than the cleaning lady and the burger flipper actually.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
How about instead of a typical minimum wage, there is a law that requires some kind of profit , ( and risk ) sharing with employees.
You don't think employees are shouldering any risk in our current system?
You realize every employee is basically giving the company a loan every day. The company pays it back afew weeks later.
Our current tax and company structures take no account of the value labor imparts, they only value capital.
Cheap storage VM.
Explain to me how JK Rowling stole her money. Yeah, that's what I thought. Typical asshole.. My lack of success is someone else's fault. They musta done something bad! whaaaaa
> Creating jobs for the sake of jobs is a horrible reason. Basic income.
Let me complete that last sentence: "Basic income ... can never work."
Dont push for a doomsday policy that can only end in disaster.
Jobs will take care of themselves. Neo luddism is lame, uneducated, and dangerous.
So he's getting about 1% of the profits of the company. Given at the end of the day it is his strategy that you and your coworkers are executing that makes those 10 figure profits, it's probably a realistic compensation package.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
We lost refining and forging capacity because the companies decided not to keep up and improve. Other countries had made a competitive product and these companies just relied on Made in the USA as their only selling point.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
...I think the term "earn" needs to be more clearly defined in this type of discussion....
Well, she was on the government dole when she wrote her first book. So, obviously, she stole it from the government.
It doesn't need to be anything that complicated. Just pull up a chart showing increases in wages and increases in productivity from, say, 1950 to now. They used to track rather closely. They became completely decoupled in the late 1970s.
We are producing far more while being paid the same as the 1970s. That's not how it's supposed to work.
I really don't like farting smoke.
All things considered, it's still an employers' economy.
They set the wages, and there are still an excess of potential employees for each job. When the actual demand for employees exceeds the available pool of personnel, only then will you see a truly dynamic increase in wages and employer effort in employee retention.
Until then, it's smoke and mirrors.
I'm not in the US, but work for an American multinational. Where I live there is a fair bit more pressure on wages in some areas.
If that legal citizen is bonded and insured, you bet I'll pay the extra (assuming they do a good job and are productive with their time.)
Chances are, that's not the choice I'd be faced with, though. Most people would deal with companies having more than one employee, and the customer would have no knowledge of the immigration status of those employees.
Here's a nice chart explaining how income inequality was both solved and created. In the 20's/30's we had enormous income inequality -- even worse than today -- but workers organized, fought, died and voted together for their rights. As a results, union membership expands in the 40's,50's and income inequality goes down. Reagan -- who's first election win was as president of a labor union ironically -- dismantled unions and demonized them. Membership goes down, inequality goes up.
None of this, of course, excludes the ability for their to be bad unions or union leaders any more than there are bad/corrupt judges in any judiciary. But instead, that just as a good judiciary is important for a functioning country, so is a good union system for income inequality. Which should make sense, as income inequality was literally the problem unions were created to solve.
-- Political fascism requires a Fuhrer.
Riiiight. You think employees are going to be okay with risk sharing? I have no doubt they'd all be for profit sharing but you are high if you think they'd be okay with having to share in the bad times.
Besides, the whole argument is ludicrous. I've dumped a hundred thousand dollars and change into my business, to get it to a profitable level. Now, after taking all of that risk, you want me to share the profits? I, alone, did all of the work in the beginning. There was nobody who helped for free. Had the company failed, I would have been the guy who lost all of his money.. Nobody else would have taken a hit.
I don't think I'm an unfair or greedy person. Quite the opposite. But after shouldering all that extremely hard physical and mental work, there is no fucking way I would share anything. I'll pay a good wage, but that's it.
Before you even claim this only would apply to large corporations, don't forget they employ less than 20% of the population (in the United States). Small business employs 80% of the workforce.
Your blatant attempt at communism is disgusting.
I wonder if it's a bit telling that you chose to post anonymously here? Will you even read my reply to your comments? Probably not ....
But doctors losing out with single-payer actually DOES bother me, quite a bit. Just writing off the fact that a rockstar doc won't get rewarded anymore for his superior skills is the most un-American thing I can think of. That goes against every fiber of what our Capitalist system is about.
Sure, we're an outlier by doing things the way we do. We're also an outlier by having a Democratic Republic as our governmental system.
It disturbs me that so many people can't seem to think outside the box on healthcare, and are convinced that the preferred single-payer healthcare plan operated by socialist governments is the only way we could possible solve healthcare issues we've got today.
Anything above that means child labor or Grandpa working into his 70s!
Guess what?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_syndrome
Casteism
That's irrelevant. Seriously ... Lots of things "work" in other countries, despite oppressive or sub-optimal systems of central governance there.
I can go to many Communist / Socialist nations and see that they have perfectly serviceable road systems in place. I can see that even dictatorships in corrupt nations might have some sort of public school system established for people.
The point here is, the USA has the *only* attempt at running a Democratic Republic, which rejects the idea that government operates and funds anything beyond the basics outlined in our Constitution. An increasingly number of people seem to just want to throw their hands in the air over our challenges and problems, and decide we should just copy the European countries, embracing socialism and tossing our existing system out. They're rambling on about free college educations for everybody and free healthcare for all, etc.
You know? We *do* have government provided healthcare for certain situations, such as our war veterans. Ask anyone how great the care is at the VA hospitals though. Yeah, kind of pathetic. But hey, our veterans can say they get free healthcare and medications!
I believe the free market and practicing Capitalism actually works pretty well. It's never been "perfect", but nothing ever will be, because human nature. It's funny how with medical care and production of medications though, it's this ONE area where none of that has a chance of working properly so only government can make it right? I think we just need to do a little more "out of the box" thinking about how to manage healthcare within the existing structure. Single-payer healthcare/Socialized medicine won't encourage any doctors to excel at what they do. It'll drive many of the good ones out of the field. It'll ensure everyone gets SOME kind of care, but it's probably not going to be that great. We have a whole civilization brought up on the idea that you earn money based on the quality of the work you do ... not that you get a fixed pay rate, decided by government, for as long as you promise to fill an opening they've got.
Wow, you really have drank a lot of the right wing cool aid, havenâ(TM)t you. There really isnâ(TM)t any point discussing this further.
If you reply, do so only to what I explicitly wrote. If I didn't write it, don't assume or infer it.
I would too. E.g.: I need some tree work done. I pay through the nose for tree guys who .. have workmans comp. (The ones without are also legal as I know they were born in the US but I won't take the risk of getting sued by a workman who injures himself on my property.
Don't you folks ever hire anyone? Typically one pays by the hour for a tradesman unless he or she (mostly he) quotes you a "for the job" price. Even so if they f--- off they'll come back to you and say 'it took me longer than I thought it was going to, so here's the bill for the extra."
First off, I said thought experiment, which by definition means I don't think it is entirely realistic. 2nd isn't it basically a more transparent way of doing what everyone already does? Isn't any wage basically a small percentage of the company profit? .001% or so? The difference being risk is shared based on either loss of employment or salary reduction? This has the advantage of ,depending on implementation, disentangle a lot of benefit problems, because you could expect all employees to cover thier own insurance and workman'so comp etc. Or pay a fee to a third party processor to handle thoseverything payroll and tax issues.
1) keeping salaries in a fixed and transparent relationship to profits
2) providing a greater sense of risk / reward as a motivation for employees.
3) might
âoeTolerance applies only to persons, but never to truth. Intolerance applies only to truth, but never to persons.
I missed the "though experiment part". I apologize.
I can admit when I've been an ass. :)
Let me add this: Wealth isn't a pie that needs to be distributed evenly. Wealth is created constantly. That is to say, the pie keeps getting bigger. Easiest example is.. go dig up some gold.. You're now richer than you were 5 mins ago, but you took zero money from anyone else.. Nobody is poorer because you are richer... In a.. hrm... fair system (no monopolies, no fraud, etc) this will keep the system chugging along..
I just read an article today that said the number people living in abject poverty has decreased by about 80% in the last 200 years.. yet the rich are richer.. But.. the poor are richer.. Everyone is richer... It can and does work like that..