At 04:24 PM 1/27/01 +0100, Jeroen wrote:
>>My position is that your wage should be determined in part by your
>>contribution to society. The value you bring to the market should be the
>>value you bring home from your market. If you are unskilled, then you are
>>likely not producing much value, and should expect your work to be valued
>>as such - minimum wage.
>
>Actually, many corporations are kept up and running by those unskilled,
>minimum wage people. If it weren't for low-ranking employees like
>receptionists, cleaning staff and cafetaria staff, not much would be done
>anymore. If the entire management doesn't do any work at all for a week,
>the company stills keeps running. But what do you think will happen if for
>a whole week the production personnel goes on strike, or your office
>building doesn't get cleaned for a week, or there is nobody around to make
>coffee for a week? Exactly: everything in the organisation comes to a
>grinding halt... Whaddaya mean, unskilled people don't contribute much and
>don't produce much value? Hah!
Come on now, Jeroen - that's a bait and switch. I did not argue that
"low wage workers produce nothing of value." Rather, I argue that low
wage workers produce things of less value than other workers. There is a
huge difference between the two, and you argued against the former, not the
latter.
Consider the following twist on your key sentence: "But what do you think
will happen if for a whole week the highly skilled/paid employees go on
strike?"
Same conclusion, right?
Not really. In your scenario, Jeroen, if the low skilled/paid staff
leaves for a week, the company will probably just hire other workers.
Why? Because they are low skilled, and therfore there is an abundant
supply of them. Business then resumes as usual.
Now, in my twist on your scenario, it is highly unlikely that a company
could easily replace the highly skilled/paid workers. Why? Such workers
are in such supply? In fact, they are in such supply that corporations
often get into bidding wars for the most highly skilled managers and
executives available.
This is one of the essences of economic thought - value is defined by
marginal benefit. i.e. what is the difference between this and your next
best alternative? For a low skilled/paid worker, the marginal benefit is
minimal. There is probably someone just as good as you are out on the
street. For a high skilled/paid worker the marginal cost is high - as you
might well be nearly irreplaceable.
So, yes - low skilled/paid workers do produce value for a corporation -
just not very much in comparison to the other workers at said company.
JDG
__________________________________________________________
John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - ICQ
#3527685
"Never tiring, never yielding, never finishing, we renew that purpose today:
to make our country more just and generous; to affirm the dignity of
our lives and every life." - George W. Bush Inaugural Address 1/20/01
