7 ms·

Why does it have to be a choice? Raise the median, raise the minimum, use wealth created through higher productivity and a healthier labour market to redistribu

by kaashif 29d ago

Why does it have to be a choice? Raise the median, raise the minimum, use wealth created through higher productivity and a healthier labour market to redistribute to some degree, everyone wins? The frictions we're talking about, like health insurance being tied to an employer, make things worse for families anyway - getting rid of the distortionary regulations that cause that can only be a good thing.

somenameforme 29d ago
Higher productivity and other such benefits are a leap. I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that people who work at a company longer end up more capable of contributing to that company. In some ways this could even be an argument for the cause of enshittification of everything. When everything is liminal, it somewhat directly leads to a 'get mine and go' type mindset, which in turn leads directly to enshittification, no longer term than next quarter thinking, and so on. I've always assumed the cause of this all was MBAs, and I still think it's the primary cause, but perhaps we're creating this certain from multiple directions all at once.
- kaashif 29d ago
  Being able to efficiently allocate labor with a more mobile workforce does increase productivity, this is well studied. Here's a source, although it isn't that detailed and is more of a descriptive literature review: https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/103581/job-quality-and-economic-mobility_0.pdf https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/103581... This too: https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/2025/07/oecd-employment-outlook-2025_5345f034/full-report/reviving-growth-in-a-time-of-workforce-ageing-the-role-of-job-mobility_6fdecf3a.html https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/2025/07/oecd-employment... - but I didn't have time to read it in detail. I don't think anyone believes labor mobility reduces productivity.
  - somenameforme 29d ago
    That not what the paper says. They're saying that good quality jobs can lead to higher productivity. That's something discovered by Ford way back in the early 20th century when he stepped from the typical 60+ hours of the week down to our now normal 40 hour work week and saw productivity/worker increase at each step down. For my little hypothesis to be incorrect you'd need to demonstrate that a company with less experienced workers (in terms of years worked at that specific company) is more productive than with more experienced workers. I think that's very improbable.

by kaashif 29d ago

somenameforme 29d ago

Higher productivity and other such benefits are a leap. I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that people who work at a company longer end up more capable of contributing to that company. In some ways this could even be an argument for the cause of enshittification of everything. When everything is liminal, it somewhat directly leads to a 'get mine and go' type mindset, which in turn leads directly to enshittification, no longer term than next quarter thinking, and so on. I've always assumed the cause of this all was MBAs, and I still think it's the primary cause, but perhaps we're creating this certain from multiple directions all at once.

kaashif 29d ago
Being able to efficiently allocate labor with a more mobile workforce does increase productivity, this is well studied. Here's a source, although it isn't that detailed and is more of a descriptive literature review: https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/103581/job-quality-and-economic-mobility_0.pdf https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/103581... This too: https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/2025/07/oecd-employment-outlook-2025_5345f034/full-report/reviving-growth-in-a-time-of-workforce-ageing-the-role-of-job-mobility_6fdecf3a.html https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/2025/07/oecd-employment... - but I didn't have time to read it in detail. I don't think anyone believes labor mobility reduces productivity.
- somenameforme 29d ago
  That not what the paper says. They're saying that good quality jobs can lead to higher productivity. That's something discovered by Ford way back in the early 20th century when he stepped from the typical 60+ hours of the week down to our now normal 40 hour work week and saw productivity/worker increase at each step down. For my little hypothesis to be incorrect you'd need to demonstrate that a company with less experienced workers (in terms of years worked at that specific company) is more productive than with more experienced workers. I think that's very improbable.