Hacker News

points by blitzar 1 day ago | 0 comments

The second is solved ... its called a bonus.

Now you've permanently handed power to employers to claim every year is "a tough year" and pay people less, while tricking people into uprooting their lives and taking jobs under the pretense of "the salary is low but you usually get a crazy big bonus!"

Let me guess, your next rebuttal:

> "But then we'll create more policy to try to stop the downsides of the first policy we created!"

Now you have a patchwork of 48,000 regulations all collectively harming the efficiency of the economy and creating all sorts of weird un-intended consequences and loopholes for low-trust people to game instead of rewarding honest people for doing the right thing like you intended.

[–] tancop 1 day ago

The only policy that's needed is unions everywhere with industry wide bargaining like they do in Denmark. Or even better employee ownership.

[–] brainwad 1 day ago

The thing about employee ownership is that, almost by definition, employees don't have much capital (that's why they live by selling their labour) and businesses need capital to survive. That capital has a cost, either interest on loans or profits going to outside shareholders.

[–] blitzar 1 day ago

> Let me guess, your next rebuttal

My actual response "But then we will have to deal with biases, discretion and management collecting their 10mil bonus by giving the juniors a pittance"

The flip side of course is people who actually work in bonus heavy revenue generating roles - where the impact is easy to measure - tend to leave if they are not valued and take their clients with them.

Things work a lot better in a healthy economy with competition and low friction for people to move around - exploitation blossoms when people are trapped by economic circumstances