it seems really obvious to me that a "labor shortage" is the natural outcome of not paying people enough but i'm just some fuckin guy and not a harvard economist pulling down six figures or whatever


liberal economists: the law of supply and demand rules over everything

also liberal economists: why wont people work for 8 bucks an hour?? mods????

it almost seems like the Demand for labor is larger than its Supply

@dankwraith (I'm not in the US, so all of the below is my comments on what I'm seeing from the outside). Labour shortage is an interesting term, in that labour is very obviously seen as the resource which can be in demand. They could just as well have called it "job excess" instead, as that would shift the focus from the point of view of the employer to the employee.

At least according to economic theory, in a completely liquid market, the equilibrium point is reached quickly, which in this case means that the salaries will rise until demand have been met. I think what we're seeing in the US

It's not that economists don't understand why people aren't willing to work for nothing. All of this is very well understood. The problem is that there is now a realisation that the previous equilibrium point wasn't the result of a liquid market, but thanks to policies that serve to keep wages artificially low. The reactions from policy makers is now to try to enforce new policies to return to the artificial equilibrium point. Quite the shift from their usually stated goal of wanting to promote a free market.

Sign in to participate in the conversation is a place for friends