Isn't that kind of like the old minimum wage question? If $15.00 is good, why not $100.00?
Who knows when the Rubicon is crossed?
This isn't a snarky inquiry; I'm very interested in this stuff, but will never get a full grasp, I don't think.
It makes people have more "claims on future labor" that they are a "master" over.
Whether this is beneficial or not comes down to how many of those "claims" they need to transfer to the owner of the grocery store, gas station, utility company, etc.
In a deflationary environment, those with artificially high wages will be the first to lose their jobs - since businesses will need to cut cost at every turn in order to keep their doors open.
“Who knows when the Rubicon is crossed?
This isn’t a snarky inquiry; I’m very interested in this stuff, but will never get a full grasp, I don’t think.”
I too have a great interest in economics. I’ll address why we won’t ever have this down to an equation. Economics is non-linear and, all of the myriad elements in play react with one another. The circumstances of what happened in 2008 or 1929 may be exactly the same today as far as we can tell, but we won’t get exactly the same result. We might get the opposite, or a sideways result. You’ll often see terms in economics articles like “unexpectedly.” This isn’t the politically unexpectedly meant to let Democrats off the hook for something they did. I think it means that there are so many factors in play that no computer on Earth could figure them all and even if it did, they change with respect to one another. It may be that oil is cheaper this time, or there’s more grain supplies than last time, or simply that the world is a nicer or nastier place than before.
You shake the dice, blow on them, and throw.