MIT graduate student says income inequality is actually about housing

Re:MIT graduate student says income inequality is actually a... by tomp on Friday November 20, 2015 @10:36AM (#10601676)

> employment is usually a deal that is unfair and weighted heavily towards the employer

I agree with most of your comment, but the sentence above is a bit of a fallacy. Sure, the employer isn't paying you the whole of the value you generate, but it works the same in reverse - you're getting paid much more than you would be if you were working on your own.

Math:

X = what you can produce on your own Y = what your employer can produce without you Z = what you and your employer can produce together

employment only makes sense if Z > X + Y. In that case, your split of Z is > X, and the employer's split of Z is > Y.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:MIT graduate student says income inequality is actually a... by crimsonalucard on Friday November 20, 2015 @12:01PM (#10602259)

Z is not what the employer and I can produce together. Z is what I and other employees produce when working together. The employer itself is just a thin layer of leadership that gets way more compensation then it deserves.

The reason why employers get an unfair share is due to strategic and organized negotiation. They utilize the might of the entire organization itself to negotiate salaries with each individual employee. Unions are designed to counteract this unfairness.

[ Parent | on HN ]