Well, if you just see everyone as cogs, great. Stringer Bell read Adam Smith, too, right?(Guess who I think the bigger gangster is...dude, that was in there, the whole time and I just got it...kudos, Mr. Simon, you angry liberal motherfucker.)
Natter 63: Life after PuppyCam
Off-topic discussion. Wanna talk about corsets, duct tape, or physics? This is the place. Detailed discussion of any current-season TV must be whitefonted.
ETA: [to bon]
I think we have a different opinion on what "success" is.
The economic definition is often not the popular-type one...one of the reasons I struggled hard with econ. Well, that and the charts. I suck at charts.
I think we have a different opinion on what "success" is.
Well what would make a successful labor market for waiters, then?
Well what would be? People choose to work as waiters, no one is being forced into it. That indicates that pay is adequate to ensure a supply of people willing to work under those conditions. They may want to be paid more, we all do. But they accept less.
Well sure, Mr. Carnegie, but one of them tunnels is like to cave in and KILL somebody we keep on borin' that fast...
Well what would make a successful labor market for waiters, then?
One in which their wage is not dependent on the whims of the people they break their backs to serve.
People choose to work as waiters, no one is being forced into it. That indicates that pay is adequate to ensure a supply of people willing to work under those conditions. They may want to be paid more, we all do. But they accept less.
Um. I didn't get forced into it at gunpoint, it's true, but I sure as hell wouldn't be slinging pasta for tips if I could find a job that would a) give me health care and b) existed.
Well what would make a successful labor market for waiters, then?
Consistent pay, health care, lack of turnover....
Health insurance would be nice too since its employer-based in this country.
Dr. Krugman says that would be the best way to get(and keep) our economy on track. He used a lot more words than that.
One in which their wage is not dependent on the whims of the people they break their backs to serve.
Consistent pay, health care, lack of turnover....
But then isn't this true of all jobs? Restricting the example to at-will jobs, couldn't I just say that the job market for lawyers needs statutory or political intervention because the health care is expensive and sucks, the hours are long and inconsistent, 98% of associates leave in four years, pay is partly dependent on the whims of partners, and qualifying for the job costs $100K+?