• michael rowle

    what the fuck are you talking about, that’s not the argument. The argument is that adaptively chemicals combine in an adaptive manner for this short fucking period on earth that “humans” exist. It’s determined, you have no choice. It’s an illusion, yea put your finger on your nose. There it is, the proof. Humans exist for 1/infinity. Think about how small that is and how small your brain is with your smug fuckin look on your face. It’s people like you in academia that drive people insane. Go get a job in a factory or work on creating a fucking engine, stop thinking about stupid things like this and incorrectly I might add.

  • Roger Avalos

    Will, you said:
    “restrictions on skilled immigration increase the wages of local skilled workers. The work of locals may become more economically valuable, due to the forced scarcity caused by stingy visa rationing, but that doesn’t mean they’re “pitching in more” in the sense of value to society.”

    You are saying that in this case the locals are not adding more total value to society, which is true. However, the marginal value of what they do produce is higher (demand curves slop downward because of diminishing marginal utility). The restrictions are not inefficient because of the higher wages, it is the lost production from the labor restrictions.

    You also said:
    “I know a number of academics who used a job offer from another department to get a hefty raise. I also know a number who are too guileless to ever play this game.”

    These negotiations happen because markets, and academic markets in particular, are not perfectly competitive. This is because of transaction costs, asymmetric information etc. These all create deviations from wages equaling marginal productivity, but do not change the that wages are being pulled towards that marginal productivity. Also, not all academics have the same productivity. Being a less productive worker, I may have a hard time finding the guile within me to seek an outside offer.

    “But a worker may become more productive due to some innovation in a technology that complements his or her skills without having done anything to increase his or her productivity.”

    First, they did do something to increase their productivity: they started using the new technology. Second, if a worker doesn’t “do” anything to become more productive, but they are more productive, who cares? It’s not the effort that matters, it’s what is produced.

  • It’s not the effort that matters, it’s what is produced.

    Exactly.

    I think Will injected the notion of moral desert into this where Don hadn’t intended it. I think “Pitching In” more means producing more; not necessarily deserving more credit or being more virtuous, or whatever.