throwaway_hey

There isn’t an open market where the worker can get a clear market value for their salary. The companies hold far more information than each worker. Nuances like this non-clearing behavior, geographic forces, compensating differentials, and monopsonies make labor economics it’s own field of study.

We don't have to look forward, we can look backwards and see that temperatures are rising. https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/

==No matter where 2020 ends up in the standings, it will be warm enough to knock 1998 out of NOAA’s top 10. When that happens, all of the 10 warmest years in their records will have occurred since 2005—and the top seven will have occurred since 2014—Sánchez-Lugo says.==

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/will-2020-be-the-...

You aren’t wrong, but we need to be careful when applying typical market economics to the labor market. It has its own field of study specifically because some of these relationships/intersections breakdown in the employee-employer relationship.

A classic example is the lack of perfect information in the labor market like you see in a commodities market. A more specific example is the wage-fixing scandal that hit tech companies [1]. In this case, the companies used their market power and unified to lower worker wages and stop them from crossing the street for more pay.

[1] https://www.cnet.com/news/google-adobe-apple-intel-settle-wa...

Articles about “conservative bias” get pretty good engagement. It’s interesting to see the flip side of that accusation playing out in reality.

I’m not sure that’s going to help bridge the gap. Further re-trenching is the exact type of thing this article is warning against, no?