• nyan@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      9 months ago

      Indeed. Where’s that pic of the tardigrade with the violin again?

  • Swordgeek
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    The news here isn’t that companies will actually have to pay their employees (marginally) more.

    It’s that being forced to pay employees a slightly larger fraction of what they would have made a decade ago is considered the “top risk to the economy.”

    Read that again. “Paying employees is the top risk to the economy.”

    This is why capitalism needs to be burned to the ground.

    • skozzii
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      “This is why capitalism needs to be burned to the ground.”

      Say it again louder for those in the back!

      Capitalism has become literally the cause of almost all of our problems in this age. Billionaires should not exist.

    • baconisaveg
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Read that again. “Paying employees is the top risk to the economy.”

      That shouldn’t really be surprising to anyone though. Employees are a huge expense.

      If my rent goes up, or the cost of groceries keeps going up, that’s a huge risk to my financials as well. Yet no one expects me to just roll over and take it, I’ll look for a new place with lower rent, even it if means downsizing, and I’ll look for lower priced food items or even cut specific foods from my shopping list. And this is while I keep on spending my disposable income/entertainment budget, and putting money into my RRSP/TFSA, and keeping money in a savings account in case of an emergency. Just because I have reserves doesn’t mean I want to pay more for rent or food.

      Companies are no different. Can you explain to me how it makes good financial sense when I do it, but when a company does it people freak out (even though they have no valid alternatives)?

  • dlpkl@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    9 months ago

    I’m taking this to mean that more money is ending up in the hands on banks and landlords, not that the employees have more exposable income.

  • Nik282000
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    9 months ago

    What we’re seeing in the survey is that the businesses are needing to pay more to enable their workers to absorb these higher costs of living.

    Could have fooled me.

    • yeehaw
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      Didn’t we all know this like nearly a decade ago?

      • Swordgeek
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        9 months ago

        Didn’t we all know this like nearly a decade THREE CENTURIES ago?

        FTFY

  • folkrav
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    9 months ago

    more PPP and lower pay is their answer to the crisis lol

  • Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    Nah man, that’s just the demand for Canadian living increasing. Hence you need to pay more for something that is more in demand (Canadian worker).

    Seriously, can someone point to any instance where free market dynamics were good for workers and the owner class didn’t cry about it?