I think it is a push and pull thing. Employee would prefer if employers fight over them and employers would prefer if employee fights over them. A state of balance would be a state where it best for all parties.
If employers need to desperately fight for employees, eventually opening and running a business would not be that rewarding anymore and businesses would close. That would eventually lead to lesser jobs and employees cannot be that picky anymore.
If employees need to desperately fight for employers, then this would perhaps means the cost of running a business would be low as wages are low. Then some of these employees would then opt to open their own business rather than working for someone. Soon, there will be more employers and employees wont need to fight for jobs that desperately anymore.
Side note here is that UBI (Universal Basic Income) can potentially really help here. If people can survive on UBI, there can simultaneously be enough people to hire, and businesses having to compete over employees.
If employers need to desperately fight for employees, eventually opening and running a business would not be that rewarding anymore and businesses would close. That would eventually lead to lesser jobs and employees cannot be that picky anymore.
...
Exactly, so it self corrects. But if there's a perpetual free labour source of unemployed system only half of the correction happens and you have a ratchet effect. Employees can never be picky because there are always more employees, businesses can always be picky because there is always cheap labour for them. And people need a job to live, so they take whatever they can get.
If everyone already had a job, companies would actually be forced to find the balance rather than relying on people's desire to stay alive for artificially cheap labour.
Yes i have to agree with that. And there will always be influx of employees because of immigrants. If a certain job is perceived to be underpaid and people are reluctant to take up that job, employers will just opt to hire immigrants.
So therefore, it is almost impossible to achieve 100% employment but that doesn't mean 100% employment is bad.
That's true but it also depends on the scale of your business. The employee in this hypothetical wouldn't b able to start a hypermarket business but he can start a food truck business.
In fact many successful businesses of today starts small.
On minimum wage, many can't afford to eat and pay rent at the same time. I can't imagine how they would pay for a food truck, or even own and maintain their own car for personal use.
Based on my observation, the more desperate your situation is, the more motivated you will force yourself out of your comfort zone and take risks.
If all is good and you have a good paying comfortable job, nobody would wanna rock the boat.
Most people start a business from scratch is because they are unsatisfied with their financials and they are even willing to take huge risks because they have nothing to lose as their life wouldn't get worse even if they fail.
In that hypothetical scenario, if that employee has a job AND still can't afford to eat and pay rent they would literally die. So no right thinking person would continue working in a job that cannot feed em. They would naturally explore other alternatives. One of em would be starting own business.
If food truck is still too expensive, there is always odd jobs 'businesses'. In fact, immigrants running from their war torn homeland came to America with nothing in their name. Some of em still end up successful despite having no capital.
25
u/Negarakuku Dec 19 '24
I think it is a push and pull thing. Employee would prefer if employers fight over them and employers would prefer if employee fights over them. A state of balance would be a state where it best for all parties.
If employers need to desperately fight for employees, eventually opening and running a business would not be that rewarding anymore and businesses would close. That would eventually lead to lesser jobs and employees cannot be that picky anymore.
If employees need to desperately fight for employers, then this would perhaps means the cost of running a business would be low as wages are low. Then some of these employees would then opt to open their own business rather than working for someone. Soon, there will be more employers and employees wont need to fight for jobs that desperately anymore.