So you support unionisation of workers to demand higher wages? Because you seem ignorant of the fact people DO work and are NOT being paid a living wage for that work. The world doesn’t owe billionaires anything either.
Where did I say a thing about unions? Also if someone is being paid only X amount of money that means that the value of what they produce is X. Not enough for a living? Try producing better goods and services.
I followed from your logic that you should be in support of collective bargaining by the labour force to negotiate a living wage in exchange for the collective labour the provide. But you don’t apparently because you either intentionally or mistakenly believe the falsehood that employers willingly pay the full value of the labour they employ others to do. This has been shown to be false through most of human history.
This is not true. Workers are de facto responsible for using up the inputs to produce the outputs in the firm. By the tenet that legal and de facto responsibility should match, the workers should jointly get the positive and negative product of the firm (i.e. the property rights to the produced outputs and liabilities for the used-up inputs). Yet, the employer is who gets 100% of this whole product and workers as employees receive 0% @workreform
Amazon pays what they think their drivers are worth. If the drivers are not happy about it, they’re free to sell their services elsewhere.
So you support unionisation of workers to demand higher wages? Because you seem ignorant of the fact people DO work and are NOT being paid a living wage for that work. The world doesn’t owe billionaires anything either.
Where did I say a thing about unions? Also if someone is being paid only X amount of money that means that the value of what they produce is X. Not enough for a living? Try producing better goods and services.
Lol take an economics class.
Capitalism is based on the idea that workers are paid less than the value they create. How do you think businesses make profits?
Nobody who works 40 hours a week should be unable to afford food, rent and savings.
You think McDonalds gives its workers more money for producing better hamburgers? Jfc
You sound like the only conservative kid at your high school who carries a briefcase and eats lunch alone.
There are no workers in capitalism. Commie ignorance is ridiculous.
Well you certainly sound unemployable
I followed from your logic that you should be in support of collective bargaining by the labour force to negotiate a living wage in exchange for the collective labour the provide. But you don’t apparently because you either intentionally or mistakenly believe the falsehood that employers willingly pay the full value of the labour they employ others to do. This has been shown to be false through most of human history.
What you’re paid is what you deserve.
Lick those boots clean, got it. Or you’re the one wearing the boots in which case may I get your neck size in cm for the guillotine please 🥺
This is not true. Workers are de facto responsible for using up the inputs to produce the outputs in the firm. By the tenet that legal and de facto responsibility should match, the workers should jointly get the positive and negative product of the firm (i.e. the property rights to the produced outputs and liabilities for the used-up inputs). Yet, the employer is who gets 100% of this whole product and workers as employees receive 0% @workreform
This is not true. You need to understand that there are no workers, then everything will fall in place neatly.
They’re not; that’s the big neo-con lie, due to an imbalance of power.
You have businesses and corporations that are enabled to run on fundamentally broken business models by government legislation.
How many banks refused hand outs during the financial crisis they created? Didn’t hear shit about the free market then.
Stop pretending that inequality is caused by the workers.
Of course it’s caused by “workers”.
Now you’re just “being” lazy