Tim Daneliuk wrote:
On 08/16/2012 09:56 AM, Han wrote:
SNIP


Opinions versus facts. What I say are my opinions. I think I was paid
what I was worth at most if not all points in my career. I know that
others in similar positions and with similar capabilities were paid less
and others more, but that is besides the point. My point is that many
people in lower positions, tomato pickers, clerks, whatever, are paid
insufficient wages, and yes paying them more would make everything more
expensive. You may or may not agree, but my opinion is that more income
equality would benefit our society.



You're missing the point. Unless force it brought to bear to MAKE you
take a job, you're always "paid what you're worth" because you are
"worth" what the market will bear.

So if there are way more people than jobs. Then a person's worth may be
close to negligible because they all want to eat (people who want to eat
are competing against one another)? As a society, do we really wish
to support this phenomenon of the free marketplace? Maybe that's why we
have (and may need) "minimum wage" laws?

Bill



If a job is offered at a price,
it is because the buyer (employer) values the work more than the money
they pay for it. If the seller (you) accepts the job, then you value
the money more highly than you do your time to do the work. Everyone
wins. You may not be making as much as you would LIKE or THINK you should
get, but that doesn't make you "worth" it. Again, this is true as long
as no one is pointing a gun at your head.

Relevant: http://jwh.fastmail.fm/essaysfolder....ays_market.htm