Rise of productivity does not equal rise of pay for workers

Can someone defend this for me pls?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=oJ5Hq0NDErA
youtube.com/watch?v=fHm7P4TA97U&t=8s
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Did the workers buy the machines that increased productivity? Did they pay to get trained on them?

Why is it comparing output? No shit technology has gotten better so it's easier to have more productivity. What a dumbass nigger thread sage.

uhhh neoliberalism

Yes. Easy mode.

Increase in productivity is the result of improved efficiency in the means of production, not the dedication or effort of the worker.

Because the kikes are in charge,

More output doesnt necessarily mean earnings for those goods stays the same no matter the quantity produced.

Interesting how this chart start to change in 1961 its almost as if the great society affected society in a very deep way

Women started to join the workforce more often there by driving down wages with the increase of workers.

This.

So because your boss re invested HIS money into HIS company you the pleb worker should benefit? Lefty logic

I can answer this for low skilled labor, at least. When minimum wage in my city is $11.50, me being in management just means that I get $12.50/hour.
Realistically I should be making over twice as much as the people who I'm training, but the only way to do that with such a high minimum wage is to have me make as much as people who have their Bachelor's

Nu/pol/ is so fucking shillingly retarded they probably think this is the ultimate goal of human civilization. To fuck workers out of infinitely more and more cash.

>implying anyone does on the job training anymore

you're a funny goy

>1 post by this ID
Because it takes less skill per product. Saged

The lefty logic is that HIS money is gained from the corporation, which is due to everyone's work within that corporation. Including the plebs.

When he gains more efficiency, it is from machinery and things outside the ingenuity of the management or the efficiency of the workers, as dissenters agree.

The question is...isn't lefty policy more beneficial and more equal if it is not the effect of the boss but the effect of technology?

This is OP

QE 1, 2, 3, and 4?

It's fucking inflation and lobbying for laws that benefit them. Rich people are smarter with money and game the system by creating laws in their favor. That's why they are rich.

Yes I buy my own tools for work and gave spent my whole life training with them.

Cheap labor from third world shitholes and better and more efficient automization.

That is the year Jews killed JFK and took complete control

It's going to the financial sector. The wages of financial sector workers has gone up over the last 30 years while non-financial workers has stagnated.

>import cheap labor
>wow wtf wages aren't going up

this is why we need to control immigration

Finance doesn't produce anything (some might even argue that it extracts from the rest of the economy) but for some reason counts for nearly 10 % of gdp

Women entering the workforce fucked us over. Mexicans started coming over and further driving down waged. Some of this disparity is due to mechanization and other technology further reducing the demand for labor.

> everyone's work within that corporation

Not true. Some people add value, and others multiply it.

Individual workers are incapable of creating that value on their own - otherwise they would start their own businesses, instead of working for an employer.

>Can someone defend this for me pls?

Its automation. The rise in productivity is primarily due to machines, robots and computers.

So the company spends its increased profits on more machines rather than on human labor.

>Finance doesn't produce anything

do you not know how investment works?

Give me one good reason it should be 10% of the GDP (note that the chart only goes until 2010).

>do you not know how investment works?

Yes.

youtube.com/watch?v=oJ5Hq0NDErA

do you understand what GDP is?
it's the money that a country places into its economy
that finance money is going back into the economy, invested into business

Fractional reserve banking is shit, but this has nothing to do with it

Confirmed by spike in early 80s when the PC was mass produced, and again around '96 when the internet gained widespread adoption.

There was also an initial separation in 1961 - just a year after the birth control pill was released and women didn't have any biological consequences for their sexual behaviours - and thus demanded 'work rights' - effectively doubling the labor force for many industries, while keeping the number of jobs the same.

So the answer is women (specifically the birth control pill), then PCs, then the internet.

>Everyone's work within that corporation
As if those people built it. At the end of the day they get their check on the 1st and the 15th and leave their work at work. Very different story for the business owner. Don't be such a goddamn retard go through the process of starting your own business and tell me you don't deserve a much bigger cut for the enormous investment it is to start a business and the untold inherent risk involved. There are no socialist, just people who don't know a damn thing about commerce.

The workers are literally not outputting as much as they should. In fact, most workers are paid too much

it generally doesnt. Investors usually invest in other financial institutions or property, or perhaps a large and well established company which doesnt need it anyway.

>improve advertising
>adjust pricing carefully with formulas
>Carefully and strategically place product in store
>Lower cost of materials used
And then some lanky ass faggot that is a blur between genders demands all of that be added to their paycheck.

Nope. You do almost nothing pushing a few buttons at a register.

>it's the money that a country places into its economy

No it isn't. GDP includes government spending - which isn't productive at all, since it is taken out of the economy by the government in the first place through taxes.

GDP really only measures the number of times money moves from one person to another - not how much money is in the economy, or how much is added to it.

It should really be called Gross Domestic Transfer, not Gross Domestic Product.

see

Apprentice crane operator. OZero debt, job stability, on job training and high pay with little risk. All I have to do is learn is basic automotive work and understand code. Then I get 70-200k a year to drive around bulldozers, fork lifts and cranes.
Whole site basically relies on us to, faster we get shit done faster the whole job goes faster.
Wages will skyrocket because soyboys are afraid of loud machines. Probably only have to do this for 3 years since I invest my money anyways.

Rise in productivity has nothing to do with the actual worker.

Plus, my job makes an "impact" (especially because unions are dying for work) and who says I can't go to college in a few years.

Ur Late >

Immigration makes labor market too competitive. Technology has made the worker more productive.

Exactly, user. Shit is getting so efficient you could make this argument for truckers needing socialist tier paychecks in a few years because it will become 100% efficient with tesla.

Immigration and Women being forced to enter the work force under the guise of "civil rights". Oy vey.

The reason wages haven’t increased is simple.

The supply of labor has far outpaced demand.

Immigration and women entering the labor force have caused this huge increase in the labor supply.

Americain people are right about this.

>workers doing less work than ever thanks to machinery and automation

Because the absurd added cost of "benefits". If it was the 70s and their insurance plan was "lol don't get hurt idiot" theb they'd be able to out nore money in your pockets.

Instead as the world gets fatter and more stricken with hypochondria (i.e. doctor visit over flu/cold) the costs to provide basic "essential" benefits skyrockets. Nobody will apply for jobs without benefits, so they can't cease offering them either.

Didn't take these arguments seriously at first but...you are right about the massive surge in the work force due to these factors.

This is probably the best argument so far. (A few others made it earlier as well)

youtube.com/watch?v=fHm7P4TA97U&t=8s

This video is done by a group of Chicago School Economists

You do realize that it was right-wing capitalists in the 30s-50s that were saying it would be capitalism that would rise all boats through technological innovation, not merely in terms of quality of life but that it would free people of drudgery and that the work week for all would be reduced to something like 3 days a week.

>Can someone defend this for me pls?

Yes ofc i can explain this, u idiot;
Employers have to pay for more and more government spending, by taxes n shit, that parasitic ASSHOLES like you vote into force by your beloved state.

Eat shit, u scum tier subhuman.

I had a job at a warehouse. The expected productivity was 95% based on a set target. Most people were at or below this % while 2-3 of us were at around 150-180% with a large gap between those in the lead and those who failed to meet the quota. We were all paid the same. Is this fair?

The workforce doubled

>workers have access to more specialized and expensive equipment that allows them to produce more value in the same unit of time as their parents and grandparents
>equipment the company has to buy in addition to paying the worker

>wtf why doesn't the worker get paid for all the value he is producing???

Should the worker who puts dishes in a washing machine be paid more than a worker who washes dishes by hand?

You may feel righteous indignation but unless the right wing can address this the leftists will always gain power. Try to think pragmatically and not ideologically.

good look. this is a good position to stake out.

taxation IS theft

jews