New posts

Reply to thread

Message

Yep, I agree but on average work places are the safest they have ever been, and in a large part that is due to the capital investments made which have raised productivity and allowed workers to produce more, with less risk and less hours.

————

Take the mining industry for example, 200 years ago the output of a worker was very low because they were using picks, shovels and push carts. So the amount each worker could earn was very limited because their out put with those tools was limited. Eg the amount of Iron Ore 3 men armed with a pick, a shovel and a push cart could produce might be 1 tonne a day each even though they worked back breakingly hard, the system couldn’t sustain paying them more than half a pound of oats a day.

How ever fast forward to today, and a group of investors chip in a few million dollars to buy those workers a huge digger and the worlds biggest dump truck. Suddenly they can sit in air conditioned comfort and produce 1000 tonnes per day, and earn the equivalent of 100’s of pounds of oats a day.

The boost in productivity allowed by the input of the investors now allows the workers to benefit from much higher wages than they could have when they only produced 1 tonne a day each, while working easier and safer.

Of course this suddenly opens the debate of how much of this new found productivity should flow to the workers and how much to the owners of the capital that unlocked the productivity, because at the end of the day it’s a team effort between labour and capital.

Some workers and unions believe they should take almost all the output, because they think it’s all a result of their “hard work” because the days of shovels and wheel barrows have long been forgotten, and some investors think they should receive almost all of the output because they know it’s their capital that was the driving force unlocking the productivity and they are taking all the financial risks involved too.

Some how we have to balance these competing wants, because it’s only fair that workers get a fair share of the output, but at the same time if investors don’t receive fair compensation for their input the whole system can break down.

On average workers receive about 80% of the output of the economy, while investors take about 20%. (After taxes)

<blockquote data-quote="Value Collector" data-source="post: 1184520" data-attributes="member: 57577">Yep, I agree but on average work places are the safest they have ever been, and in a large part that is due to the capital investments made which have raised productivity and allowed workers to produce more, with less risk and less hours.————Take the mining industry for example, 200 years ago the output of a worker was very low because they were using picks, shovels and push carts. So the amount each worker could earn was very limited because their out put with those tools was limited. Eg the amount of Iron Ore 3 men armed with a pick, a shovel and a push cart could produce might be 1 tonne a day each even though they worked back breakingly hard, the system couldn’t sustain paying them more than half a pound of oats a day.How ever fast forward to today, and a group of investors chip in a few million dollars to buy those workers a huge digger and the worlds biggest dump truck. Suddenly they can sit in air conditioned comfort and produce 1000 tonnes per day, and earn the equivalent of 100’s of pounds of oats a day.The boost in productivity allowed by the input of the investors now allows the workers to benefit from much higher wages than they could have when they only produced 1 tonne a day each, while working easier and safer. Of course this suddenly opens the debate of how much of this new found productivity should flow to the workers and how much to the owners of the capital that unlocked the productivity, because at the end of the day it’s a team effort between labour and capital. Some workers and unions believe they should take almost all the output, because they think it’s all a result of their “hard work” because the days of shovels and wheel barrows have long been forgotten, and some investors think they should receive almost all of the output because they know it’s their capital that was the driving force unlocking the productivity and they are taking all the financial risks involved too. Some how we have to balance these competing wants, because it’s only fair that workers get a fair share of the output, but at the same time if investors don’t receive fair compensation for their input the whole system can break down.On average workers receive about 80% of the output of the economy, while investors take about 20%. (After taxes)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Value Collector, post: 1184520, member: 57577"] Yep, I agree but on average work places are the safest they have ever been, and in a large part that is due to the capital investments made which have raised productivity and allowed workers to produce more, with less risk and less hours. ———— Take the mining industry for example, 200 years ago the output of a worker was very low because they were using picks, shovels and push carts. So the amount each worker could earn was very limited because their out put with those tools was limited. Eg the amount of Iron Ore 3 men armed with a pick, a shovel and a push cart could produce might be 1 tonne a day each even though they worked back breakingly hard, the system couldn’t sustain paying them more than half a pound of oats a day. How ever fast forward to today, and a group of investors chip in a few million dollars to buy those workers a huge digger and the worlds biggest dump truck. Suddenly they can sit in air conditioned comfort and produce 1000 tonnes per day, and earn the equivalent of 100’s of pounds of oats a day. The boost in productivity allowed by the input of the investors now allows the workers to benefit from much higher wages than they could have when they only produced 1 tonne a day each, while working easier and safer. Of course this suddenly opens the debate of how much of this new found productivity should flow to the workers and how much to the owners of the capital that unlocked the productivity, because at the end of the day it’s a team effort between labour and capital. Some workers and unions believe they should take almost all the output, because they think it’s all a result of their “hard work” because the days of shovels and wheel barrows have long been forgotten, and some investors think they should receive almost all of the output because they know it’s their capital that was the driving force unlocking the productivity and they are taking all the financial risks involved too. Some how we have to balance these competing wants, because it’s only fair that workers get a fair share of the output, but at the same time if investors don’t receive fair compensation for their input the whole system can break down. On average workers receive about 80% of the output of the economy, while investors take about 20%. (After taxes) [/QUOTE]

Verification