• rottingleaf
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    4 months ago

    OK, then hiring new people they’ll pay less, and after everybody’s been rotated - for everybody.

    Which is logical, I don’t get why he adds that phrase everywhere.

    • michaelmrose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Since we are playing I run the world can’t I just say you can’t offer less than the average you are already paying for new people? If you don’t like it you can always close up shop and cede the market to someone else. Also wages are normally sticky. A large portion of your workforce works for someone else how will you ever attract them to work for you with smaller wages?

      • rottingleaf
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        can’t I just say you can’t offer less than the average you are already paying for new people? If you don’t like it you can always close up shop and cede the market to someone else

        And some employers will close up shop, causing inflation, then some wages will be raised to correct for inflation and some won’t. Those of people working in the same area as hit by such a law likely won’t, because there’ll be more people qualified and fewer jobs.

        I’d wish Bernie limited this to changing the normal work week to 32hrs, and none of the other smartassery with unpredictable results.

        The core idea is good.

        • michaelmrose@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          Employers closing up shop doesn’t cause inflation. Neither houses nor groceries get more expensive because a fast food joint closed. Marginal businesses who make poor use of cheap labor such that they can’t even make much while paying people so little they get welfare are the assholes going down.