Not circular logic, it's excactly how it works. Someone offers you money for your time and if both parties find an agreement on how much that time is worth, they've determined a value that is acceptable for both parties. No one is forced to employ or be employed.
"No one is forced to employ or be employed"
Pretty sure most people who live paycheck to paycheck would disagree.
They need to work to earn a living, but they are not forced to be employed if they think the wage is too low. That would be slavery. But I see the point that this degree of freedom poses a problem for work with a low entry barrier.
>no one is forced to be employed
Er, can you clarify? If you don't work, you don't eat.
Re:A note on programmer salaries
by danielharrison on Friday August 11, 2017 @02:52AM
(#14987204)
Like the thousands of unemployed people? Some haven't eaten for years.
That's not what he means, just like that's not what you mean.
Circumstances can differ quite a lot, and claiming that everyone is paid fairly because they aren't leaving is just crooked.
Re:A note on programmer salaries
by rubber_duck on Friday August 11, 2017 @01:48AM
(#14986888)
You are correct - to the company he's worth the amount it would take to replace him.
Plenty of people can negotiate to get closer to that so negotiating a raise isn't pointless - but lateral moves are often easier.
Although you can be more valuable in a different company - for eg. if your current company isn't good at utilizing your specializations.
Isn't that circular logic? By that logic, nothing can ever be undervalued, because its fair value is defined by how much it's sold for.
If you want to go all supply-and-demand, an employee's value is still not what they request, it's what it would cost to replace them, on average