Quote:
Originally Posted by Ark2
Wages are dictated by supply and demand. The skillset that an accountant has is more rare and in higher demand than that of a janitor, hence the reason that the accountant is paid more. Paying someone more because you feel the job is undesirable despite the fact that it is a low skill position that is not highly in demand seems quite odd to me. It also leads me to think that you do not understand how markets work.
|
I understand how markets work and the basics of supply and demand, thank you. And I understand why, today, an accountant is paid more than a janitor. My questions are centered around whether artificial demand or artificial scarcity are at play and having an adverse effect on wages, and whether UBI would remove some of that. This touches on the previous education discussion and properly preparing someone for work, somewhat.
Yes, wages are tied to supply and demand, obviously, thank you. But it feels like you forgot the supply part of the equation. The supply of workforce doesn't just depend on skillset, it also depends on willingness to do the work/desirability of the job and location of the workforce (amongst other things). Right now, being a janitor is a low-demand job, right? It's essential, many businesses and buildings need janitors, but there is a large supply of workforce because the skillset required is not hard to obtain nor is it rare. But the willingness to do the work/desirability of the job is low, so that should remove a large portion of the supply, thus creating higher wages, right? Well, it doesn't, because people need to work to survive, and even the lowest paid job is still a job. So the supply is artificially propped up. That's the issue. With a UBI, that supply would diminish so wages would be forced to go up to compensate, and reflect something that is probably closer to the true value of the work.
Supply and demand in the current state is meaningless because UBI would throw the current balance for many jobs completely out the window and force them to adjust. There would be no jobs that survive solely based on the fact that people need a job and any one would do. The ones that do survive would do so because they are essential, and the wages would compensate to ensure they were filled.
I believe a UBI would boost wages across the board for "lower class" or "low skill" work, and cause a reduction in wages for those in the highest paid positions. But that's personal belief, backed up by almost nothing, and almost entirely indefensible.