-
-
4/ It's not a fact For the first 200,000 years there was no noticeable increase in skilled labor, nor in remuneration for labor Even in last 200+ years there have been many counterexamples You falsely see a brief contingent thing as a law of naturehttps://twitter.com/realtonysm1th/status/1350920331725332480 …
Show this thread -
5/ OK, so you've seen that all successful economies exhibit wage growth, therefore you assert that by mandating wage growth you can create a successful economy. Most doctors drive BMWs. Can we impart surgical skills and high incomes by mandating BMWs?https://twitter.com/realtonysm1th/status/1350923273073258496 …
Show this thread -
-
7/ Nothing I've said is based on that premise.https://twitter.com/realtonysm1th/status/1350928850981683201 …
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
- End of conversation
New conversation -
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I get his theory: If a gizmo is created that can replace menial manual work, then people will get jobs making gizmos. But there will always be scut work. Not all scut workers learn to make gizmos. Work is exported to where human life is cheap, or cheaper workers imported.
-
Meanwhile, teenager who threw my hotdog buns in same bag with my canned beans this morning will get her $15/hour. There will always be a need for low tech manual labor. Always. And I wonder if a min wage increase will further separate the haves and the have mores.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.