What wage is just?

[leonhardprintz]

Yes, when considered relative to production, but that was not what you said.

Its simple tafan2, I know you think there’s a way to worm around the facts but there aren’t. More value is being produced, but the earnings are going to the top earners, not the workers. This means that the work is valuable, but the workers aren’t paid accordingly.

There’s no denying this fact without denying the fact that there’s been economic growth for the past fifty years (on average), but no corresponding growth in wages.

This is unjust.

 

[tafan2]

Yes, that is just saying that the value of the production should also be taken into account. But regardless, the first part sets the minimum.

 

[vz71]

You do realise a modern day worker produces the same amount of value as seven workers did a hundred years ago?

No, I do not realize this.
Please quantify for me the value of the work and compare it from one century to the next. You appear to have reached the conclusion, please provide the numbers behind it.

 

[leonhardprintz]

There’s also the sins that cry to Heaven for vengeance. They include oppression of the poor, especially widows and orphans, and defrauding the laborer of his\her wages.

Rich people don’t get to bring their money with them into Heaven, and they’ll have to render an account of how it was spent.

 

[tafan2]

I am on your side, just settle down. I was just clarifying one point you had made. Not trying to worm out of anything.

 

[leonhardprintz]

No, I do not realize this.
Please quantify for me the value of the work and compare it from one century to the next. You appear to have reached the conclusion, please provide the numbers behind it.

This is an incontrovertible fact available to anyone who’s studied a modicum economics. Look up any of the bigger statistical institutes, or do a google search on productivity increase per year.

You’re effectively denying that there’s been economic growth if you deny that workers have become more efficient, and produce more value for the same amount of work.

There is nothing to discuss here.

 

[leonhardprintz]

Anyway I know its basically afternoon for most people here. This is an American forum after all, and I live in Denmark. Which means its getting late and I’m going to bed.

Goodnight everyone.

 

[tafan2]

Here is a graph for the US:

Nonfarm Business Sector: Labor Productivity (Output per Hour) for All Workers

Graph and download economic data for Nonfarm Business Sector: Labor Productivity (Output per Hour) for All Workers (OPHNFB) from Q1 1947 to Q1 2024 about per hour, output, headline figure, sector, nonfarm, business, real, persons, and USA.

fred.stlouisfed.org

You can see the value produced per hour (after adjusting for inflation) has gone up 4 fold since 1950. If I interpret it correctly, which I am pretty sure I do.

 

[vz71]

Yes, that is just saying that the value of the production should also be taken into account. But regardless, the first part sets the minimum.

That cannot be right.
The church could not justly force a wage from an employer that would drive them out of business.
Such a circumstance would justly fall into the condition specified “in view of the function and productiveness of each one”.

 

[vz71]

This is an incontrovertible fact available to anyone who’s studied a modicum economics.

Then it should not be difficult to back your statements with some facts.

You’re effectively denying that there’s been economic growth if you deny that workers have become more efficient, and produce more value for the same amount of work.

I am not denying anything. I am simply requesting some evidence.

There is nothing to discuss here.

If you do not wish to discuss this, then don’t.

 

[tafan2]

I believe it is, I did not quote the whole paragraph, but here it is:

“The simple agreement between employee and employer with regard to the amount of pay to be received is not sufficient for the agreed-upon salary to qualify as a “just wage”, because a just wage “must not be below the level of subsistence”[662] of the worker: natural justice precedes and is above the freedom of the contract.”

 

[tafan2]

I am not denying anything. I am simply requesting some evidence.

I provided the evidence.

 

[leonhardprintz]

Brushing my teeth while reading this thread one last time.

Then it should not be difficult to back your statements with some facts.

I asked you to do a simple Google search. It seems Tanpan2 has a more graceful response. There are hundreds of links like that. Again, you’ll have to deny that there’s been economic growth. Or believe that value is produced out of nothing.

If you do not wish to discuss this, then don’t.

I’ve addressed you in a good spirit. Be careful about goading people vz71, that can become a very bad habit.

And with that I’m done brushing my teeth. Night ya’ll.

 

[vz71]

Thanks.

Now the next part of this conundrum is learning if this increase in production also increases the actual value. And also determining if the production is a result of the worker being a better worker or if he simply has better tools.

I can have a worker actually go and harvest a crop, or press the ‘on’ button for the the magical robot that does it. Is the value of the worker different for picking the crops as for pressing the button?

In essence, is this four fold increase in productivity really a four fold increase in value?

 

[vz71]

I believe it is, I did not quote the whole paragraph, but here it is:

“The simple agreement between employee and employer with regard to the amount of pay to be received is not sufficient for the agreed-upon salary to qualify as a “just wage”, because a just wage “must not be below the level of subsistence”[662] of the worker: natural justice precedes and is above the freedom of the contract.”

Quite.

The issue here becomes something different entirely.
An entry level position is not for the head of a household.
The pay rates are different, the responsibilities are different, and the expected client is a teenager looking for some spending money.

So what do you do with someone who has acquired no skills, but has acquired a few children. A living wage would dictate paying sufficiently to support a family of four. But the job itself is for an unskilled worker and is simply not of that value.

 

[vz71]

I’ve addressed you in a good spirit. Be careful about goading people vz71, that can become a very bad habit.

What exactly is this meaning?

 

[tafan2]

The issue here becomes something different entirely.
An entry level position is not for the head of a household.
The pay rates are different, the responsibilities are different, and the expected client is a teenager looking for some spending money.

Of course, which is why I estimated a typical just wage for a teenager at $5/hour.

So what do you do with someone who has acquired no skills, but has acquired a few children. A living wage would dictate paying sufficiently to support a family of four. But the job itself is for an unskilled worker and is simply not of that value.

It is a difficult situation. And a person who has acquired no skills and has acquired a few children is also morally at fault. We must prepare ourselves for the responsibilities we take on. It is somewhat an extreme case. In general, we must pay a living wage.

 

[vz71]

I asked you to do a simple Google search. It seems Tanpan2 has a more graceful response. There are hundreds of links like that. Again, you’ll have to deny that there’s been economic growth. Or believe that value is produced out of nothing.

I simply ask that you back up what you say.
It is rude to expect others to do the homework to prove your statements correct.

others do this, and it is greatly appreciated.

 

[vz71]

Of course, which is why I estimated a typical just wage for a teenager at $5/hour.

I disagree with amounts, but agree with you that ‘living wage’ means something entirely different to a teenager then it does to an adult.

It is a difficult situation. And a person who has acquired no skills and has acquired a few children is also morally at fault. We must prepare ourselves for the responsibilities we take on. It is somewhat an extreme case. In general, we must pay a living wage.

In my area of the country, I wish it were an extreme.
There are large portions of this country (USA) in which a good number of people are in that exact situation.

 

[tafan2]

In my area of the country, I wish it were an extreme.
There are large portions of this country (USA) in which a good number of people are in that exact situation.

Perhaps. I have know of quite a few small businesses with employees paid low wages and yet the owner likely pulls in hundreds of thousands in profits a year. The owners will say their workers are unskilled, yet they have skills, and they easily produce 6 figures of revenue per employee a year. But their "market"value is only 10 or 15 bucks an hour. Too many employers equate "unskilled"with the fact they can get away with paying them cheaply. A commercial painter, a experienced farm hand, a stone worker, all of these come to mind. To varying degrees, they become quite skilled overtime.