[HN Gopher] No One Wants to Pay Anymore
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       No One Wants to Pay Anymore
        
       Author : underlipton
       Score  : 60 points
       Date   : 2023-11-19 20:30 UTC (2 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (medium.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (medium.com)
        
       | noodlesUK wrote:
       | There's more to this than simple supply and demand economics.
       | People take into account significantly more factors than raw pay
       | when deciding to pick a job (and especially when leaving one).
       | 
       | Working conditions are especially horrible in pretty much all the
       | cases of "nobody wants to work anymore" that I have seen. Even if
       | you paid me a good wage, I might not want to work at a terrible
       | employer. It doesn't help that the terrible employers also
       | usually pay below-market wages.
        
         | YetAnotherNick wrote:
         | Working condition are factored in demand and supply, unless the
         | market is very small. Every position is hire-able if the you
         | pay for it.
        
           | noodlesUK wrote:
           | > Every position is hire-able if the you pay for it.
           | 
           | I completely disagree with this. I have a friend who recently
           | turned down a job that would have been a significant pay
           | increase because he didn't like the sound of the working
           | conditions (which would have also included relocation to a
           | new place).
           | 
           | Many of the times that I recall when friends have left their
           | jobs, the reason they left is not necessarily because they
           | weren't being paid enough, but because they became tired of
           | their job, or something changed at their employer that made
           | working there less tolerable.
        
             | vidanay wrote:
             | The reductionist reply to this is that the employment offer
             | didn't meet your friend's threshold for "pays enough".
             | Theoretically, if they offered your friend $1,000,000 USD
             | per year, he would have accepted the job. The economic
             | viability of that pay is a different topic.
        
               | noodlesUK wrote:
               | I'm not sure about this. I think it easily met the
               | threshold for "pays enough" in an absolute sense, but so
               | often the whole sentiment of "pays enough for what
               | they're asking from me" goes unsaid. And sometimes people
               | value whatever personal thing they might be giving up
               | (like being able to live with their loved ones) more than
               | even a very large amount of money.
        
               | ndriscoll wrote:
               | I'm sure there are plenty of people who would not take
               | $1M/yr in blood money to work for companies they see as
               | immoral (Google, Facebook, Raytheon, Philip Morris,
               | etc.). Obviously you can find plenty of people who will,
               | but money isn't everything to everyone. Especially people
               | with in-demand skills who can find good jobs elsewhere.
        
               | PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
               | Some years ago, when my name and association with amzn
               | were still sort of hot, a wall st. company offered me "7
               | figures+" to go work for them for a year or so. I lived
               | in Philadelphia at the time, was just starting up a new
               | relationship, was raising my daughter as a stay-at-home
               | parent by choice ... I said no. I think there was no
               | amount of money you could have offered me at that point
               | in time which would have been enough to make me say yes.
               | 
               | To generalize: I think there are situations where no
               | amount of compensation will make the offer worth taking.
               | How common they are ... that's a different story.
        
               | layer8 wrote:
               | I think the argument is that there is a salary at which
               | there would be _someone_ taking the job, assuming the
               | market is large enough. That someone doesn't need to be
               | specifically you in your situation.
               | 
               | Of course, it's still conditioned on the mentioned
               | assumption.
        
             | ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
             | I was a manager, at a very cheap company that paid
             | "competitive" wages _(i.e., below market)_.
             | 
             | I had to work quite hard to make the team a pleasure to
             | work at.
             | 
             | It seemed to have worked. When they finally rolled up US
             | engineering, 27 years after I joined, the employee with the
             | _least_ tenure had a decade.
             | 
             | These weren't losers. They were highly experienced C++
             | image processing pipeline engineers.
             | 
             | Good managers make a difference.
        
               | noodlesUK wrote:
               | 100% this.
               | 
               | People want to be happy. Once a person's financial needs
               | are more-or-less met, it will be very hard to convince
               | them to leave, even for substantially more pay, if they
               | know their new job will make their lives materially worse
               | for ~8h/day.
        
             | YetAnotherNick wrote:
             | He factored in the cost right. Different people factors it
             | in differently. And that is how market rate is decided. I
             | refuse to believe that the company can't find another
             | candidate who is willing to take the job if the pay is
             | good.
        
           | ndriscoll wrote:
           | Assuming you need some level of competence, if you have
           | sufficiently bad working conditions and wanted to rely solely
           | on pay, then at some point you'd have to pay enough that
           | someone could quickly retire, which means it'd be impossible
           | to find experienced hires.
        
             | YetAnotherNick wrote:
             | Average wage of drain cleaner in US is $52,930[1] and for
             | mining machine operator which is among the riskiest job it
             | is $81,741[2], not exactly a quickly retiring wage.
             | 
             | [2]: https://www.salary.com/research/salary/hiring/mining-
             | machine... [1]:
             | https://www.talent.com/salary?job=drain+cleaner
        
               | ndriscoll wrote:
               | Sure, there's a supply component as you say. If you need
               | some level of competence (i.e. you can't just hire
               | whomever), that strategy isn't going to work.
               | 
               | If someone can make six figures already as an electrical
               | engineer or programmer or something, then even if you
               | offer $1M/yr for your totally crappy job like another
               | poster said, the best you'll get is that they'll do it
               | for 6-12 months and quit. Try to put golden handcuffs on,
               | and they'll just start coasting once they've gotten
               | enough. Try to prevent that (e.g. have a clawback if you
               | fire them), and they won't take the deal because they
               | don't trust you not to screw them.
        
           | coffeebeqn wrote:
           | This is assuming that all the people have equal grounds to
           | negotiate on. There are also seasonal workers, illegal
           | immigrants, slaves, etc
        
           | ddingus wrote:
           | Nope.
           | 
           | There are bad condition scenarios that would require far more
           | compensation than filling the position delivers value.
           | 
           | "Not worth it" is a very real thing.
        
         | Gibbon1 wrote:
         | Recently went to get a vaccine shot. Making talk with the
         | pharmacist she let the mask slip, working conditions are
         | horrible. The problem with supply and demand is like everything
         | from economics[1] it acts as if only money is important. And
         | discounts things like being able to hold up psychologically.
         | When your pharmacists are at the breaking point where they're
         | going to up and quit at the first opportunity because they
         | can't stand the job anymore, your system is sick indeed.
         | 
         | [1] First rule of economics, humans are robots obsessed with
         | money.
        
       | fullshark wrote:
       | Some businesses' economics simply don't make sense if their labor
       | costs grow X%. Maybe they can charge more to make up for it, but
       | it's actually not as simple as "this business owner is being
       | cheap."
        
         | Jaygles wrote:
         | Yeah, the larger symptom is there is less money to go around
         | after buying necessities. Inflation stings twice, cost savings
         | on necessities will include shifting purchases from less-
         | efficient local businesses to more-efficient global mega corps.
         | And the slice of income that goes to desires will shrink which
         | also reduces spend on local businesses.
         | 
         | So the local businesses get hurt from both ends. Their costs of
         | inputs also rise, and the demand for the services decrease. The
         | only businesses who can keep or lower prices and also pay more
         | for labor are one's that have large profit margins.
         | 
         | And then even if there's enough profit margin to survive the
         | hair cut, that may lead to a situation where the business
         | owner's time and effort could be better spent on other
         | opportunities. So even profitable businesses may close if the
         | owner thinks they could do better.
        
       | pbjtime wrote:
       | Business: "I'd like to buy paper."
       | 
       | Wholesaler: "That's $x per team."
       | 
       | Business: "The market price has gone up. That means people don't
       | want to sell paper anymore!"
       | 
       | THAT'S HOW YOU SOUND, OUT OF TOUCH WHINERS
        
         | jjoonathan wrote:
         | "There's a shortage of $30k Lamborghinis!"
        
       | gambiting wrote:
       | Ah the good old "no one wants to work anymore":
       | https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/nobody-wants-to-work-anymo...
        
       | gedy wrote:
       | The article ignores the step after paying people more - they
       | usually need to raise prices too, and customers balk and don't
       | want to pay either.
       | 
       | That said, my opinion is if rent was cheaper, a lot more people
       | would be willing to do these service jobs of it meant they could
       | live independently.
        
         | rcarr wrote:
         | > my opinion is if rent was cheaper, a lot more people would be
         | willing to do these service jobs of it meant they could live
         | independently.
         | 
         | This is 100% it. The housing market in the Anglosphere is the
         | root of all problems. At least in the UK, I'm anticipating a
         | single issue party to form in the coming years, like UKIP but
         | solely for housing and renting reform. It would have the
         | potential to steal votes from both the left and right and
         | become a formidable power.
        
           | PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
           | ... until BricksIt (TM) passes and like UKIP it fades away
           | into irrelevance.
           | 
           | Hopefully, unlike UKIP, not into disgrace.
        
         | schrectacular wrote:
         | And would make it easier for business to make ends meet too.
        
         | oddevan wrote:
         | I think you hit the nail on the head here: "if rent was
         | cheaper"
         | 
         | The jobs that that people "don't want to work anymore" no
         | longer pay a living wage. Between rent hikes squeezing the low
         | end, high interest rates squeezing the middle class, and every
         | major company from oil down to Kellog's raising prices but not
         | wages, people can't _afford_ to take menial, minimum-wage jobs
         | anymore.
         | 
         | Oh, and a bunch of people died because of COVID, so supply has
         | been affected too.
        
         | slyall wrote:
         | "I interviewed a Japanese bespoke shoemaker last month and
         | asked why are there so many craft-based businesses in japan,
         | like bespoke tailors. He said rent is relatively low in Tokyo,
         | so if you have a passion for making suits and you only have a
         | few customers, you're fine"
         | 
         | https://twitter.com/dieworkwear/status/1725234349111721992
         | 
         | Low rent was both commercial and housing.
        
           | AdrianB1 wrote:
           | Isn't Japan's population decreasing dramatically, so the
           | demand for housing is not increasing like in USA? They also
           | have a very strict immigration policy, opposite of USA.
        
             | cbhl wrote:
             | That's at the country level, but _Tokyo_ was also seeing a
             | rural-to-urban migration that ran from the 1950s to a peak
             | in 2019 or so, and maintained relatively low rents between
             | housing and transportation policies compared to major US
             | cities.
        
       | injeolmi_love wrote:
       | The supply for labor depends on the marginal benefits versus the
       | marginal costs. If leisure gets cheaper, taxes go up, or jobs get
       | worse, people on the margin will choose to work fewer hours or
       | exit the workforce. There's nothing wrong about this! It's how a
       | free market is supposed to work.
       | 
       | Unfortunately, in our capitalist system, people are demonized for
       | choosing to work less or not at all. It's viewed as immoral not
       | to work, because the institutions view humans as cattle that must
       | be milked to the maximum. I expect new policies will be created
       | beyond the ones already in place to force people to work. We
       | should resist this, so I support the sentiment of the blogpost
       | even though it's misleading on a factual basis.
        
         | AdrianB1 wrote:
         | What system do you propose to solve this problem?
        
       | jongjong wrote:
       | Well, I suspect many of the people who would normally work as
       | waiters or blue collar jobs became rich on Dogecoin, dealing
       | drugs or other social scheme. The social aspect of blue collar
       | work has delivered financial opportunities.
       | 
       | And many people who studied for years and used to work as honest
       | engineers or scientists are now out of jobs don't want to work as
       | waiters or do blue collar work, especially for such a corrupt
       | system. Is it bad though? You want them to spit in your food?
        
       | asylteltine wrote:
       | Both camps are right. Some jobs don't pay enough, but also many
       | jobs don't really deserve more pay... if the government didn't
       | hand out cash like it was candy it wouldn't have been a problem
       | and we wouldn't have had runaway inflation
        
         | 303uru wrote:
         | >many jobs don't really deserve more pay
         | 
         | I love when people say this. Why do you get to decide what
         | someones time is worth? Just because you like $2 cheeseburgers
         | doesn't mean someone has to toil in the kitchen for $7 an hour
         | for you.
         | 
         | Trump handed out cash like candy to the already wealthy, not
         | sure what that has to do with low wage workers. Or are you
         | claiming that people getting $1200 once a few years ago is
         | keeping them out of the workforce today, because that's
         | hilarious.
        
         | lancesells wrote:
         | It's funny how the jobs that "don't deserve more pay" are the
         | ones that make everyone else's life so much more convenient.
         | Why do people eat fast food or get their groceries delivered?
         | Because it saves them time, effort, and money.
         | 
         | I would suggest getting a little perspective and more
         | importantly, compassion for your fellow humans. Things like
         | food are actually one of the things you need to stay alive.
        
       | chrisbrandow wrote:
       | Baumol's cost disease comes to mind here as well
        
       | anotherhue wrote:
       | Costs have risen. Odds are your salary offer isn't sensible
       | anymore. Tiny violin plays.
        
       | strangesmells06 wrote:
       | Ive noticed the worst customer service offenders are companies in
       | monopoly condition markets.
       | 
       | Utility companies, cell phone companies, student loan servicers,
       | finance companies (mortgage and house), government...,
       | 
       | etcetera
       | 
       | Once theres no competition a customer needing help becomes a
       | burden. These companies then usually outsource customer service
       | to the most clueless people and have extra long wait times.
        
         | zdragnar wrote:
         | Customer retention can cost as much as, if not more than,
         | customer acquisition, depending on the market.
         | 
         | If you're a monopoly, you can spend the absolute bare minimum
         | on both.
        
       | 303uru wrote:
       | Keep out the immigrants. Stop any and all attempts at building
       | affordable housing. Make it untenable for younger generations to
       | have children. Saddle anyone capable of going to college with
       | $100k in debt.
       | 
       | Wonder why no one wants to make me a dollar menu burger for $5 an
       | hour anymore!!!
        
       | jldugger wrote:
       | Can't readily find it but there was a pretty good Odd Lots
       | podcast on the interaction between labor supply and restaurant
       | design. California raises wages, and less labor intensive counter
       | service measurably replace table service. As is typical for the
       | show, it went into nuanced dynamics of the industry, wish I could
       | find it again.
        
       | treis wrote:
       | This is one of those things people want to be true but is not.
       | Labor participation is down significantly in those ages <25. 63
       | -> 51 and 47 -> 30 for teenagers in 10 years. Wages are slightly
       | up adjusted for inflation over that time.
       | 
       | https://www.bls.gov/emp/tables/civilian-labor-force-particip...
        
         | jchw wrote:
         | Doesn't seem to conflict much at all with the sentiment of the
         | article. Personally, I 100% understand why people are choosing
         | not to work in this economy. I'm not sure I would either if I
         | had the choice to not work and if I didn't already have a good
         | career. In other words: looks an awful lot like two sides of
         | supply and demand still. People choosing not to hire at higher
         | wages is basically the same as people choosing not to work at
         | lower wages.
         | 
         | edit: also,
         | 
         | > Wages are slightly up adjusted for inflation over that time.
         | 
         | While this may very well be true it's probably worth pointing
         | out that that does not mean wages are in good shape in general.
         | I'm pretty sure they've still significantly stagnated if you
         | start counting from a couple decades further back, no matter
         | how you quantify it. Wage stagnation isn't exactly a
         | controversial concept.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-11-19 23:01 UTC)