Unresolved question #1

1. Is there a neutral moral perspective from which union and employer demands can be adjudicated?


3 thoughts on “Unresolved question #1

  1. We’ve had this conversation before. It depends on what you mean when say “neutral”. I do believe there is a reasonable and somewhat detached perspective to assess labour disputes. It is possible to have third party arbitration so the dispute is assessed from the position of someone who isn’t self-interested in the outcome. If you mean neutral in the sense that people wouldn’t make moral judgments, possibly. If you mean neutral in the sense as an Archimedean point, something so thoroughly objective as to overcome inherent subjective biases present in all media, than no. But that is an unreasonable request.

  2. I’d say macro economics. Within a capitalist society we want:

    a) consumption spending
    b) private investment spending
    c) government consumption spending
    d) government investment spending
    e) net savings (exports)

    where capacity = a + b + c + d + e.

    c = personal savings rate + company profits

    So as we need (c) to increase wages need to decrease. That is wealth concentration is good for investment up to a point and conversely wealth distribution is good for demand. Once that’s determined how to set wages in the aggregate is trivial. From there it is easy to determine if the market is too favorable to labor to achieve the needed investment spending. If not lean towards real rising wages.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s