Workers wage not in proportion to productivity - Page 5 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

"It's the economy, stupid!"

Moderator: PoFo Economics & Capitalism Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#14720933
Bosnjak wrote:Image

here a nice chart

A lot of the income of the top 1% of Americans comes from abroad. Nearly all big corporations are multi national. The left are untrustworthy liars, they deliberately try and cover up the huge increases in the wages of Chinese, Koreans and others since 1979. Of course your average American leftie college professor doesn't care that the so called Capitalist systems has pulled billions out of poverty in recent decades, he she is only interested in feeding their narcissistic Marxist fantasies. Its like did the Marxists of the Soviet Union or their droollng middle class fan boys and girls in the West care that six million working people were starved to death in the Holdomor? Of course not they only cared about their theocratic Marxist identity politics.
#14721438
Bosnjak wrote:Image

here a nice chart


Rich wrote:A lot of the income of the top 1% of Americans comes from abroad. Nearly all big corporations are multi national. The left are untrustworthy liars, they deliberately try and cover up the huge increases in the wages of Chinese, Koreans and others since 1979.


.. i.e. workers who are less productive than the US workers whose jobs the 1% exported. So not only are workers' wages not in proportion to productivity, but neither is profitability.

Of course your average American leftie college professor doesn't care that the so called Capitalist systems has pulled billions out of poverty in recent decades, he she is only interested in feeding their narcissistic Marxist fantasies. Its like did the Marxists of the Soviet Union or their droollng middle class fan boys and girls in the West care that six million working people were starved to death in the Holdomor? Of course not they only cared about their theocratic Marxist identity politics.


Perhaps, but that doesn't rehabilitate the idea that rewards in capitalism are proportional to productivity.
#14721870
SueDeNîmes wrote:Perhaps, but that doesn't rehabilitate the idea that rewards in capitalism are proportional to productivity.

In modern mainstream neoclassical economics, rewards under capitalism are defined as being equal to contribution to production: whatever anyone has, they must somehow have earned. This absurd notion was stated explicitly by John Bates Clark, the founder of neoclassical economics (and namesake of the American Economics Association's most prestigious award), in his seminal 1891 paper, "Distribution as Determined by a Law of Rent."
#15045341
Truth To Power wrote:Also socialist exploitation, labor theft, and ownership crime.

Labour in socialism is not exploited because people are not owned by wages, money, nor family. Theft does not exist in socialism since private property does not exist. Ownership crime does not exist in socialism since private employers cease to exist, thus having no position of economic power.
#15045489
SSDR wrote:Labour in socialism is not exploited because people are not owned by wages, money, nor family.

Labor is indisputably exploited under socialism because people and their rights to liberty and property in the fruits of their labor are owned by the collective.
Theft does not exist in socialism since private property does not exist.

Theft is universal under socialism since private property does not exist.
Ownership crime does not exist in socialism since private employers cease to exist, thus having no position of economic power.

Ownership crime is universal under socialism since the collective expropriates the private producer's product.
#15045593
Truth To Power wrote:Labor is indisputably exploited under socialism because people and their rights to liberty and property in the fruits of their labor are owned by the collective.

Exploitation exists when labour is owned. In socialism, labour is not owned, thus the definition is useless and is an useless statement.
Theft is universal under socialism since private property does not exist.

Theft cannot exist unless there is private property. In socialism, private property does not exist.
Ownership crime is universal under socialism since the collective expropriates the private producer's product.

There is No "private producer's product" since private enterprises and privatized economics do not exist in socialism.
#15045604
Average Voter wrote:I have noticed that workers who produce ten times the product of their peers only make three to four times as much as their peers. Is this expected in capitalism? Why does this happen?


Workers don't actually work 10 times more even if their productivity is 10 times higher. Productivity is the result of technological innovation and investment, which is independent of the workers.
#15045738
SSDR wrote:Exploitation exists when labour is owned.

Wrong. Exploitation only exists when people are deprived of their liberty, rights, and bargaining power.
In socialism, labour is not owned, thus the definition is useless and is an useless statement.

Nope. Wrong. You can't define exploitation out of existence, sorry.
Theft cannot exist unless there is private property.

The fruits of one's labor are always one's private property.
In socialism, private property does not exist.

So all production is stolen from the producer.
There is No "private producer's product" since private enterprises and privatized economics do not exist in socialism.

Production is always immutably a private action.
#15045944
Atlantis wrote:Workers don't actually work 10 times more even if their productivity is 10 times higher.

Not ten times more, but to ten times more effect.
Productivity is the result of technological innovation and investment, which is independent of the workers.

Garbage. Technology and investment can't improve productivity unless the workers can take advantage of them. And workers are most certainly not all equally productive, even in the exact same job with the exact same technology and investment. Anyone who has ever employed anyone knows that a good worker is far more productive than a bad one, and some actually have negative value: productivity would be greater if they stayed home.
#15045970
Truth To Power wrote:Not ten times more, but to ten times more effect.

Garbage. Technology and investment can't improve productivity unless the workers can take advantage of them. And workers are most certainly not all equally productive, even in the exact same job with the exact same technology and investment. Anyone who has ever employed anyone knows that a good worker is far more productive than a bad one, and some actually have negative value: productivity would be greater if they stayed home.


For Pete's sake what world do you live in? It certainly isn't this one.

Even if the productivity of a trained worker varies according to talent, it's not more than a few percentage points. Thus, 10 work hours are 10 work hours. If some are paid 3 times more than others for the same work, it is entirely due to protectionism.

Productivity is entirely due to technological innovation and investments. A man with a bulldozer [technology + investment] has 1,000 times more productivity than a man with a shovel. Doesn't mean he should earn 1,000 times more. In fact, the man with the shovel works harder than the man with the bulldozer.

You most certainly haven't done a day's worth of productive work in your life.

Europe finally decided to honor one of its greatest sons at his true value :lol:

Image
#15045982
Atlantis wrote:Productivity is entirely due to technological innovation and investments. A man with a bulldozer [technology + investment] has 1,000 times more productivity than a man with a shovel.


There's a guitar company in California, Taylor Guitars, which uses technological innovations to help build their guitars.

One innovation was the use of robots to spray the finish on the guitar. It does it faster than any human could, and sprays an identical amount of finish on each guitar. It never needs to take breaks, and it can work as long as their are guitars which need finishing.

They also use a UV cured finish. Instead of a finish taking anywhere 18 hours and a week to cure, it now takes about 50 seconds. These technological innovations allow the guitar builders to build more; a lot more, than they could before.

This is a good video of Bob Taylor explaining the process: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wyOTT8nxs0

The video also covers other aspects of how technological innovations have greatly increased efficiency and productivity...
#15045998
Truth To Power wrote:Wrong. Exploitation only exists when people are deprived of their liberty, rights, and bargaining power.

This statement is contrary. Non socialist economics deprives the liberties of people, their rights due to being ruled by wages, money, organized religion, and family. Bargaining power is not a necessity in a socialist economy.
Nope. Wrong. You can't define exploitation out of existence, sorry.

You can't define exploitation at all.
The fruits of one's labor are always one's private property.

Private property is a motive that is used to motivate false conscious people to work. They need that to motivate them to work because they are manipulated psychologically to believe that they need private property to motivate them to work.
So all production is stolen from the producer.

Capitalist caricature of socialism. Nothing can be "stolen" on a productive scale in socialism since nothing is privately owned. As usual, you are explaining socialism in a non socialist, objectivist leaning manner.
Production is always immutably a private action.

In a socialist economy, a labourer does not need money to assemble a part. Economic private actions do not exist in socialism because labour is not owned, private property does not exist, and currency does not exist. In a capitalist context, people work for free, people live for free. Humans would not need to pay to live in the World.
#15046752
Atlantis wrote:For Pete's sake what world do you live in? It certainly isn't this one.

Sorry the facts prove you wrong.
Even if the productivity of a trained worker varies according to talent, it's not more than a few percentage points.

False. You have obviously never employed anyone.
Thus, 10 work hours are 10 work hours. If some are paid 3 times more than others for the same work, it is entirely due to protectionism.

Nope. You can even see the proof that you are wrong in a class of schoolchildren: give them 1000 level-appropriate test items to do, and see how many each child has got right after an hour. Then subtract twice the number of wrong answers from the right answers. You will find their productivity varies by an order of magnitude. Same with work.
Productivity is entirely due to technological innovation and investments.

Wrong again. The school children all have the same technology and investment.
A man with a bulldozer [technology + investment] has 1,000 times more productivity than a man with a shovel. Doesn't mean he should earn 1,000 times more. In fact, the man with the shovel works harder than the man with the bulldozer.

You seem to have no idea how the market sets wages. The cat operator is competing with other cat operators, not shovel operators. Duh.
You most certainly haven't done a day's worth of productive work in your life.

:lol: :lol: :lol: You just made a fool of yourself again. You cannot even imagine the kinds and amounts of production I have performed.
Europe finally decided to honor one of its greatest sons at his true value
Image

Marx's true value is wildly negative.
#15058072
Typically there's an inverse relationship between wages and productivity.
But when we define productivity we have to be specific. We're not necessarily talking about in the total population, but of workers who are employed. One of the primary reasons productivity goes up is simply because "less productive" workers are simply no longer employed.
This isn't really the good type of productivity increase.
#15058499
Puffer Fish wrote:Typically there's an inverse relationship between wages and productivity.

No, there's a positive correlation, but it's pretty weak.
One of the primary reasons productivity goes up is simply because "less productive" workers are simply no longer employed.

Not so. Cross-country comparisons show it's mostly technological advancement combined with investment in producer goods and education.
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8

No loss if Drlee leaves at this point, he's been a[…]

A max speed of 400 km/h - A Chinese train maker r[…]

Election 2020

@colliric , right now, give Trump all the states […]

@blackjack21 , and @Potemkin , what's an oddba[…]