ET wrote:I'll repeat: The problem with your argument is that it presumes to negate one of the basic laws of economics - that the higher the price, the lower the demand of a product. These studies go to great lengths to argue that labor is somehow immune to that law. I'm not buying it. Labor is not immune to the law of supply and demand.
You're right. It's not. That's assuming, of course, that business is following the law of supply and demand, and the greater principles of a capitalist economy in its operation, which is not the case. Human factors, i.e. varying levels of greed, the ability to wedge an advantage to the favor of business using the power and influence of its money, the influence of trusts and monopolies all skew the law of supply and demand, and as a result, both wages and prices require some outside power or influence to level the playing field. The contrast between an unregulated economy, and one that has experienced the effects of organized labor and government regulation in America alone, over the course of time, is a prime and clear illustration of the failure of an unregulated capitalist economy. There will always be someone who is willing to use their resources, take a gamble, and cheat the system to gain an advantage. A big picture study of world economics shows that the highest standards of living, with shared prosperity and economic growth and development, exist in countries where the government is an active participant in the economy, as both a regulator and a consumer, and where individual freedom allows workers to organize to level the playing field of labor supply and demand. Where that doesn't occur, there is massive exploitation and poverty.