$100k a year - as a Garbage Man???

Nilly said:

And just like how natural law isn't the only way to measure 'efficiency', dollars per task isn't either.

Click to expand...

In what way do you measure work for pay to find efficiency?

I'm sure the world of business accounting is eager to be enlightened.

code1211 said:

In what way do you measure work for pay to find efficiency?

I'm sure the world of business accounting is eager to be enlightened.

Click to expand...

Well no, business accounting won't be enlightened, because they're concerned with $ values. So the below is an answer to the part of the post I bolded.

You can measure work by social good, you can measure work by environmental good, you can measure work by preservation and promotion of culture.

Not everything has an economic profit motive, and many pursuits that achieve the above are worth doing even if they're a net expense economically. It's why we maintain our national parks, for example.

eohrnberger said:

If that's what the market will bear, sure, why not? It's not a glamorous job, and I'll bet it's a physically demanding job. The job market at work, and working.

Click to expand...

I'm not begrudging them anything.

As for the physically demanding...depends on the company you work for. See below.

Dragonfly said:

This is becoming more and more the norm:

Click to expand...

Dragonfly said:

I'm not begrudging them anything.

As for the physically demanding...depends on the company you work for. See below.

Click to expand...

I don't think that video shown is the most common case.

I know that around here the guy on the back of the truck has to hoist every garbage can from the curb into the back of the truck, so that the compactor arm can get it and pack it into the storage space. Figure 2 or 3 30 lbs cans per house in a neighborhood built on city lots, so pretty closely packed. Yeah, I'd say that's physically demanding day.

Physically demanding is a relative term. Our refrigerated product distribution center has guys who work building 30 or more pallets per day for shipping, and each box on the pallets weights over 50 pounds. Then there's the dudes in the frozen goods section...where the boxes are lighter, but the temps are -20 to -30 degrees.

Nilly said:

Well no, business accounting won't be enlightened, because they're concerned with $ values. So the below is an answer to the part of the post I bolded.

You can measure work by social good, you can measure work by environmental good, you can measure work by preservation and promotion of culture.

Not everything has an economic profit motive, and many pursuits that achieve the above are worth doing even if they're a net expense economically. It's why we maintain our national parks, for example.

Click to expand...

An obvious dodge.

ALL work that is done for pay is measured by the number of widgets produced for the number of dollars paid.

You are either being intentionally ignorant of simply unaware.

Taxpayers pay taxes. Those taxes are a burden on the taxpayers, but we pay them understanding that social good proceeds from the prudent outlays of money to achieve valued outcomes.

Removing the waste from our cities is one of these. By your notion, there should be no limit on any income for any job as long as that job provides a greater good.

Question: Why limit the income of garbage men to $100,000? Why not $1,000,000,000 or $1,000,000,000,000.

Why limit anyone's income by any rule or economic rationality?

In your mind, if the outcome is a good one, like National parks, why not pay the workers Rock Star incomes?

If ANYONE is earning any amount for any activity, then certainly these public servants deserve the same level of compensation, don't they?

I eagerly await your response and justification for the increase in taxes to support public wages and the increases in prices to support the private wages.

Eating is important. Shouldn't a waitress earn a million or so dollars a year?