Maybe in fantasyland. In the real world, it does not work that way, particularly for the average worker with the average skill set. Without collective bargaining, such workers will typically be paid little more than a subsistence since they are easily replaced.
Maybe in liberal fantasyland. In the real world, it does not work that way, as employees who engage in collective bargaining kill the businesses they work at, and employers who do not pay employees what they are worth lose out to competition who
does.
Labor is purchased just like any other good or service.
And what if you lacked the cerebral aptitude to obtain a masters degree?
Then I would have done what I
also did, which was agree to sign up for 4 more years of service in order to be trained in a different career field, one with civilian applications.
What is to become of the infantrymen who are less gifted; should they be doomed to a life of exploitation and meager subsistence? How are they to leverage a decent wage, and do you even give a damn?
Actually you can make pretty good money in the non-cerebral fields. One of my buddies who got out realized that his current skill set sucked, so instead of sitting around and threatening his employer, he went and improved himself by getting trained as a plumber. Not a lot of 25 year olds with no college education can pull in $50K+. Another took some college and became an HVAC guru, and I understand is doing pretty well for himself. Another was willing to pony up the time and effort to get trained to go work on the oil rigs in the Gulf of Mexico, which pay pretty dang well. All these guys faced a world in which their skill set was in low demand, and so they went and added new skill sets to allow their labor to charge a higher price in the market.
If you think that being treated as a commodity, "according to the Supply/Demand curve," is a measure of self-worth or a pathway to self-empowerment then you are philosophically dyslexic. The world will NOT treat you as you determine. The world will treat you like a cog in the machine and throw you away at its convenience. If this is truly your philosophy, then my advice to you is to watch out, for you are sure to be broadsided by a terribly painful realization someday, especially if you are not self-employed.
Doubtful. Because I take ownership of my own circumstances, I am willing to be proactive in insuring them, rather than resentful and coercive in forcing others to subsidize them. That is what you seem to be missing, here - there is a difference of type between our worth as individuals and the economic value of our labor at any given point in time, and
recognizing that and taking
ownership of yourself is a key ingredient to the free life. No, a union member is a cog in the machine - they think that their value is only found in the machine - no one threatens to go on strike all by their lonesome. Like a slave they (and you) think that they are helpless victims of their circumstances. A
free man thinks his labor is worth something in and of
itself, and that he has the ability to improve that value.
I don't know what hippie commune you grew up on, but the quality of your "being in the world" is under discussion here, and this quality is wholly connected to your monetary compensation whether you realize it not.
I would agree. The worth of the individual is wholly unconnected to the economic value of their labor.
Organized labor assures a human minimum to the demand axis (as far as wages are concerned), because below that minimum lies exploitation and subsistence
Sadly it does not, because the
real "minimum wage" is zero. When you put in place an artificial floor on labor, you simply lower the demand for low-value labor, with a corresponding increased measure of difficulty for the poorest and most vulnerable among us. That, after all, is why we put minimum wage laws into effect in the first place.
