The Reality of Working for a Supermarket in 2009/Return to Victorian Britain

ninky_2

bendix wrote: »

Hey ninky. Finally we agree on something. The ability to b*****t at length is directly proportionate to one's ability to earn money in modern society.

Can't argue with that.

yes but what you are able to !!!!!!!! about varies in value. much of what i can !!!!!!!! about is just to do with upbringing and cultural exposure. nothing inherently superior about me than my OH who didn't even know who paul mccartney was. if we valued more diverse cultural input into our cultural products (e.g. tv shows) then his worth would increase and mine would go down. the fact that my knowledge is actually more mainstream and his more unique counters your argument about supply and demand. what he can supply is much more scarce than what i can. so it comes down to demand - and you've got to question where the demand actually comes from and the power basis of this.

i8change

The market forces DO work on salaries - it can't be denied.

But some employers, in the same market treat their workers better than others in the same market. Some of us take this into account, others don't care or don't know. It is not complicated to understand.

lostinrates

ninky wrote: »

..... the fact that my knowledge is actually more mainstream and his more unique counters your argument about supply and demand. what he can supply is much more scarce than what i can. so it comes down to demand - and you've got to question where the demand actually comes from and the power basis of this.

I seem to recall you saying you had a grant/scholarship/internship that was highly applied for: one presumes this was apllications from pople with mainstream knowledge and that you must have something over a lot of others with mainstream knowledge to have secured this?

bendix

ninky wrote: »

the fact that my knowledge is actually more mainstream and his more unique counters your argument about supply and demand. what he can supply is much more scarce than what i can. so it comes down to demand - and you've got to question where the demand actually comes from and the power basis of this.

It doesnt counter the supply and demand argument at all. Just because he has something scarce to offer doesn't make it worth anything. It's only worth something if it's in demand. Scarcity is not a predeterminate of value; demand is.

Where does demand come from? Well, that's a whole different debate. It could only be a liberal elitist paternalist who would suggest that mass demand is somehow wrong and muddle-headed or shaped by external forces. Perhaps people like c**p because c**p feels good to them.

Don't go and get all Ralph Miliband / Herbert Marcuse on me now, ninky. That just wouldn't do.

i8change

Whether it's legal or not is irrelevant. The point is the freemarket determines these very low wages because there is a surplus of people wanting to do the work. The market has spoken.

And HMRC replied:-

The role of HMRC is to enforce the national minimum wage. We do that by responding to complaints made about employers suspected of not paying the minimum wage, and by visiting a sample of employers about whom no complaints have been made, to check that all employers meet their obligations under the National Minimum Wage Act.

With the backing of the people of course.

The point is the freemarket determines these very low wages because there is a surplus of people wanting to do the work.

Actually, at lower levels of pay the market is not entirely free and competition for job's that don't provide a living wage is set to a certain extent by the level of Tax Credits families get for doing that job. The direct link between work and income has been broken in a large way. Someone with skills and at a higher grade with bonus may, ultimately, get less money than someone at a lower grade without bonus.

i8change

What's your point? Salary levels are dictated by supply and demand.

And profit margins, so some employers, in the same market, treat/pay their workers better regardless of the supply and demand.

ninky_2

bendix wrote: »

It doesnt counter the supply and demand argument at all. Just because he has something scarce to offer doesn't make it worth anything. It's only worth something if it's in demand. Scarcity is not a predeterminate of value; demand is.

Where does demand come from? Well, that's a whole different debate. It could only be a liberal elitist paternalist who would suggest that mass demand is somehow wrong and muddle-headed or shaped by external forces. Perhaps people like c**p because c**p feels good to them.

Don't go and get all Ralph Miliband / Herbert Marcuse on me now, ninky. That just wouldn't do.

well it's clear that in the sort of 'advanced' capitalist society we live in much demand is manufactured by those with more capital in order to maintain and improve on their position.

as for l-i-r assertion that i must have something over others with the same background...possibly. but my point is that not everyone gets to have that background. arguing that those who have to work in minimum wage (or worse) exploitation kind of deserve what they get is patent nonsense. the same person born into completely different habitus will not achieve the same level of success imho.

if mass demand is not shaped by external forces why is so much investment put into advertising?

Phirefly

ninky wrote: »

my uprbringing with exposure to liberal cultural inputs along with native english and ability to !!!!!!!! about things that are of high value in mainstream cultural products (property, celeb culture etc etc) appeals to commissioning editors in television

Are you gathering material here and now on this thread?

lostinrates

ninky wrote: »

. arguing that those who have to work in minimum wage (or worse) exploitation kind of deserve what they get is patent nonsense.

I'm not arguing that (if arguing at all, I'm trying to dog deepier into both sides of the argument really). I am saying those who have skills beyond those required for minimum wage jobs or more, may deserve more. Many might have acuired those skills at personal cost and, more and more now, accruing debt. Do they deserve more to recompense for this period of no earning and paying for education? We might be morally equal, but we might not be financially so, I'm not convinced the two are indivisable.

ninky_2

lostinrates wrote: »

I'm not arguing that (if arguing at all, .

no i know l.i.r. you are far too reasonable to argue. i was referring to bendix i guess in that regard.

the thing that makes cultural capital such an effective tool is it can mask inequalities as 'innate' - the gastronome with superior taste, the reviewer with superior ability to judge a good film etc. etc. of course it's all nonsense that merely justifies the class (and other dominant power) structures. the chav is no worse dressed than the couture show attendee.