New here?
Create an account to submit posts, participate in discussions and chat with people.
Sign up
My perception is that wages have stagnated due to active suppression methods in the USA as the boomer generation had higher wages as adjusted for inflation, while productivity gains have been made via technological developments so there should be more money available to pay workers higher wages

So my question is about how to raise wages?

Frequently I'm seeing people on the right (maybe mostly older people?) argue for regular workers to be paid less in wages you can't live independently on, while I sometimes hear stories of older people who were able to raise families on simple jobs

My understanding is that a lot of the extra profits have gone to shareholders and CEOs, that could have gone to workers, to keep wage rates up

A couple thought experiments come to mind to visualize this, like thinking about a small business owner who pockets all the profits from his business, versus an employee at a similar business who is paid a wage at a much smaller rate - while there is more risk that that owner takes than the employee, the "mere" ownership of the business yields a higher pay rate. (Some corporations that take loans on money printed out of thin air that they can get bailed out on by the public if they go bust, do not even take the "ownership risk" that many identify as the justification for lower wages for workers and higher rates paid out to CEOs / shareholders)

So, I guess one answer to how to increase "wages" is for people to be business owners

A second answer is to encourage more people to become the shareholders who are getting lots of the profits from these businesses, I guess

Could more money simply be paid out to workers from the monies that are going to CEOs / shareholders?

A second visualization experiment is that of American factory workers being paid good living wages, and of these jobs being "outsourced" to some other country at lower wage rates; the profits again from this move, must be going to shareholders and CEOs of the company, whereas before they were going to American workers

So the idea that the "hands are tied" of businesses and they must pay below "living wages" isn't really a set in stone argument, as seemingly in the above manufacturing job example they could have just "paid more" to keep the jobs with American workers

Another problem with some of this discussion is a back and forth appeal to some "objective" wage rate, versus the subjective theory of value in capitalism; in other words, frequently wages and prices are set just arbitrarily based on what people want. Ergo, it's equally as "rational" in a "free market" to argue that workers ought to minimally be paid $30/hour as it is to argue that they should be paid $5/hour - just like you could argue CEOs should only be paid maybe 10x that of the average worker versus 300x (which is where it is about at in 2026).

I suppose the other part of this discussion is that "wages" don't necessarily need to increase, so much as we need effective secondary investment schemes so that people can grow even small wages into larger sums of money to pay for their needs. It's possible for people to make investments that see returns much beyond wage rates they can work for. However, I don't see why we couldn't do both: increase wages as well as leverage investments.

So anyway, I was curious about what could be done to raise wages in society or if you think this is a desirable goal or if some secondary or other goal might be focused on to generate wealth and prosperity generally in society

edit: a quick AI discussion led to a conclusion of two main drivers of wage increases:

1) productivity gains. This directly increases the monies or value available to distribute.

2) ownership of capital. This gives you the ultimate claim - in part or totally - to the productivity gains produced.

Maybe a lot of the rest of the discussion is edge cases around these
59
Yes, He is Jewish (media.scored.co)
posted 2 days ago by Heliocentric on scored.co (+0 / -0 / +59Score on mirror )
53
posted 2 days ago by USSDefiantJazz on scored.co (+0 / -0 / +53Score on mirror )
14
CONSOOM The Pervitin (cdn.videy.co)
posted 2 days ago by linden687 on scored.co (+0 / -0 / +14Score on mirror )
12
posted 2 days ago by linden687 on scored.co (+0 / -0 / +12Score on mirror )
Honestly more prophetic than originally expected, and I'd seen passages of it here before.

It's a little more generous with the assumption of values for the third worlders than anyone here would be, but not by much. And much harsher against the suicidally empathetic in Europe and America. I consider that a positive

Not exactly a happy story, but reality seldom is

Solid 10/10. Cannot recommend enough. Everyone should read it
56
CONSOOM Modern Television (media.scored.co)
posted 2 days ago by linden687 on scored.co (+0 / -0 / +56Score on mirror )
47
Consoom (((Ugly Thoughts))) (media.scored.co)
posted 2 days ago by USSDefiantJazz on scored.co (+0 / -0 / +47Score on mirror )
23
posted 2 days ago by derjudenjager on scored.co (+0 / -0 / +23Score on mirror )
76
It’s simple (media.scored.co)
posted 2 days ago by Webspawner3 on scored.co (+0 / -0 / +76Score on mirror )
37
Consoom Morning Thoughts (media.scored.co)
posted 2 days ago by USSDefiantJazz on scored.co (+0 / -0 / +37Score on mirror )
16
Consoom Reminder (media.scored.co)
posted 2 days ago by USSDefiantJazz on scored.co (+0 / -0 / +16Score on mirror )
23
posted 2 days ago by BlackPillBot on scored.co (+0 / -0 / +23Score on mirror )
10
posted 2 days ago by JulesVerne on scored.co (+0 / -0 / +10Score on mirror )
45
Anglo Saxon Pilled (media.scored.co)
posted 2 days ago by Heliocentric on scored.co (+0 / -0 / +45Score on mirror )
28
C'mon (media.scored.co)
posted 2 days ago by steele2 on scored.co (+0 / -0 / +28Score on mirror )
11
posted 2 days ago by genesisSOC on scored.co (+0 / -0 / +11Score on mirror )
Jury of your fears (youtu.be)
posted 2 days ago by BlackPillBot on scored.co (+0 / -0 / +6Score on mirror )
Introduction

I was wondering what people here have thought about primitivism (using less technology) and anarchism (there being less to no "government")

I was thinking about these topics when thinking about the political ideology of the USA for the Memorial day holiday weekend

As a teenager, the experience of "American freedom" was enjoyable, so I considered the idea of "anarchism" or taking "liberty" to its full logical extent to be possibly desirable

I think for me the idea of the old American less inhabited frontier seemed attractive, of someone having a plot of land and being self-sufficient ("individualist anarchism")

This kind of vision would only work somewhat with less technology (leaning in a "primitivism" direction), for if you need to make use of more developed machines, you become dependent on a complex network of people producing the machines

Anarcho-Capitalism

Eventually I was confronted with perhaps some of the naive views of "anarchism": for example, if there is no law against it, could someone just attack you and take all your things?

However, it was suggested in response, that if someone is "free" to do this, someone is also "free" to respond with self-defense; at this point, mere "anarchy" seems to transform into more of the vision of "anarcho-capitalism", or something like government entities existing without you having to have one central government

Because, in such a scenario, you would also be "free" to team up with friends to form something of a police force, of rules (laws) you agree to commonly, and of other such functions that we have centralized governments perform for us today

So, even if it is technically "anarchy", or there is no one single government, still it seems "naive anarchy" resolves to something of a "decentralized 'State'" existing - it's just not one entity, but it may be a collection of entities that we might group together and view as a "State" in one area

I guess a question is about if this is viable or desirable today ("anarcho-capitalism")

Such "anarcho-capitalists" (ancaps) I've seen frequently suggest that this would do away with taxes, which are involuntary costs paid to a government; however, while you might be "free" from paying for a police force to exist, in practice you'd probably want police protection, and hence would pay a fee that is like a "tax" that is somewhat involuntarily imposed upon you by the state of nature of needing police help

Objection Example: What About the Children?

Certainly if you consider a lot of objections against "anarchy", one for example might come up that children might lack protections that exist under a government

I concede that this could be an issue, but on the other hand it seems like even with a big State we end up with legalized abortion and plenty of abuse happening (whether by organized elites, or a common person) - so I'm not sure more abuses of children would or wouldn't exist (and I would enjoy hearing people's thoughts)

Technological Dictatorship

But I guess my question is about if we ought to move our government in the USA more towards smaller government (minarchy) or no government (anarchy), or about what goals exist for the development of our country going forward

Are we instead moving towards bigger government and more dependence on technology ("technological dictatorship") and is this process somewhat inevitable?

Big corporations buy up smaller companies and grow even larger; States acquire new territories (like Trump eyeing up Greenland and Canada) to become larger; we keep building up a bigger global technological "machine", now powered by many datacenters to run AI programs

So is resistance to this movement towards "One Technological World Government" just a temporary measure before inevitable "End Times" that will come, and to what extent is it desirable to form smaller operations (small companies which are subject to going out of business towards larger corporations, or smaller governments or entities which are subject to warfare by larger States, or primitive lifestyles which are subject to being forcibly disrupted by technological developments?)

Conclusion

In our current political situation, a lot of us have "tribally" rallied around MAGA with Trump as the leader (not everyone on ConPro, lol), as we face many who don't share our values teaming up to bring us towards some other "vision" of what society should be; but I guess I was wondering what people think the ideal vision is to work towards in the face of the threat of "technological dictatorship" and if something of "anarchist primitivism" in contrast is desirable or an extreme to avoid, with a "lower tech small government" kind of situation being advocated for, or even something else entirely
26
Once Upon a Time (media.scored.co)
posted 3 days ago by Heliocentric on scored.co (+0 / -0 / +26Score on mirror )
posted 2 days ago by wankingisgay on scored.co (+0 / -0 / +3Score on mirror )
74
consume prescriptions (media.scored.co)
posted 3 days ago by yi456796 on scored.co (+0 / -0 / +74Score on mirror )
Toast message