Max Sawicky wrote:
> Evidence we don't need no stinkin evidence . . .
>
> On the theory side, the simple idea that if a person
> with given skills can suitably perform the duties of
> an auto worker or sandwich man, there is some
> pressure on employers to offer more similar wages
> than otherwise (lower for the auto maker, higher
> for the sandwich mogul).
Given any collection of quantities (a, b, c, d . . .) it is a tautology that one can
equate any one of them with unity, then express each quantity in terms of the selected
one. Hence one could, for example, take the average wage of bank window clerks as unity
and express every other wage as some multiple of that wage. Is there any theoretical
*or* empirical reason to believe some one wage should be set at unity in that all
others vary as it does, but it is not affected by others?
My own guess would be that *if* there is a key wage it is the wage for non-labor
(public aid, disability, unemployment, etc.). I have no evidence for this. Mere
speculation. Wages paid illegals might fall in the same category.
Carrol
