27-11-2004 22:39									#1
	Are labor supply and freedom related? Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Reviewing history does it seem to any of you that the lower wages are the more freedom we have?

Before the Black Death of the 14th century feudal lords moved to free their serfs so that they could collect high rent. After the Black Death they moved to change the laws to prevent serfs from becoming free because the rents were too low.

Then came mercantilism with the ceilings on wage, because of the labor shortages. That continued on until the 18th century when labor supply was in abundance. Then the movement was towards free markets.

Does anyone agree or disagree with me? What will happen when the labor supply starts falling again? What would happen if we had another epidemic like the Black Death?

Last edited by Kidicious on 27-11-2004 at 22:50

	27-11-2004 23:16									#2
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

High wages and freedom are both bribes used by the ruling classes which are more in need in cases of labour shortages. They'll thus tend to coincide.

	28-11-2004 00:05									#3
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

This seems like an interesting debate, alas I don't feel informed enough to select a posistion at random, dive in, and defend it to the bitter bitter end.

Instead I'd like to ask you to define 'Freedom' in this sense, as alot of talk about Freedom recently leads me to believe that essentialy Freedom is just a different term for 'capitalism'. In which case greater labour supply = greater capitalism, or 'Free-dom' as you call it.

	28-11-2004 00:12									#4
	Inflate your Upload Space

I thought a labor shortage was good for people because the value of their labor went up. That one of the reasons, I think, why China never industrialized until the 20th century (the other being the Chinese's contempt for the merchant class), they had enough peasants to do the dirty work and so no incentive to invent ways to help one person make more to overcome the labor shortages.

	28-11-2004 03:40									#5
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Odin I thought a labor shortage was good for people because the value of their labor went up.

Exactly.

quote: That one of the reasons, I think, why China never industrialized until the 20th century (the other being the Chinese's contempt for the merchant class), they had enough peasants to do the dirty work and so no incentive to invent ways to help one person make more to overcome the labor shortages.

Probably.

	28-11-2004 04:12									#6
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Before the Black Death of the 14th century feudal lords moved to free their serfs so that they could collect high rent. After the Black Death they moved to change the laws to prevent serfs from becoming free because the rents were too low.

That's correct. There's a high degree of correlation between labor supply and freedom from the state. That's why the places with the highest population densities in medieval Europe: Italy, the Low Countries, Byzantium, were the places where serfdom was the least prominent.

Similarly in the Americas, slavery was enforced due to the severe labor shortages, and was to last the longest in the lowest population density regions.

Basically, there's little need for the state coercion on labor when the market takes care of the coercion for you.

	28-11-2004 08:08									#7
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by problem_child This seems like an interesting debate, alas I don't feel informed enough to select a posistion at random, dive in, and defend it to the bitter bitter end. Instead I'd like to ask you to define 'Freedom' in this sense, as alot of talk about Freedom recently leads me to believe that essentialy Freedom is just a different term for 'capitalism'. In which case greater labour supply = greater capitalism, or 'Free-dom' as you call it.

Freedom = from others control over you. Not freedom = capitalism. For example, when the populations increased in Europe the feudal lords desired to free their serfs, but only to exploit them in the market place.

	28-11-2004 08:18									#8
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Last Conformist High wages and freedom are both bribes used by the ruling classes which are more in need in cases of labour shortages. They'll thus tend to coincide.

High wages and freedom coincide with labor shortages, true, but what about when the rulers are able to take away our freedom, for example to put a ceiling on wages or institute some modern type of serfdom?

	28-11-2004 08:34									#9
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I was under the impression that the black death actually drove the beggining of the slow march towards political freedom. Suddenly the feudal barons had to be nicer to their people because there were always other barons who could offer them slightly better conditions and therefore gain an advantage from having more labourers

	28-11-2004 08:37									#10
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Zulu Elephant I was under the impression that the black death actually drove the beggining of the slow march towards political freedom. Suddenly the feudal barons had to be nicer to their people because there were always other barons who could offer them slightly better conditions and therefore gain an advantage from having more labourers

Exactly, see my post above.

	28-11-2004 09:43									#11
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by Zulu Elephant I was under the impression that the black death actually drove the beggining of the slow march towards political freedom. Suddenly the feudal barons had to be nicer to their people because there were always other barons who could offer them slightly better conditions and therefore gain an advantage from having more labourers

The feudal barons had the same political interests. The smart thing is not to compete.

BBC

quote: Social change Life in Britain in the fourteenth century was 'nasty, brutish and short', and it had been that way for the peasantry since long before the Black Death. Britain in the early fourteenth century was horrendously overpopulated. This was very good for the land-owning classes, since it meant that they had a vast reserve of inexpensive manpower upon which they could draw. In fact, there was such a surplus on manpower, that most landlords found it convenient to relax the old feudal labour dues owed to them on the grounds that men could always be found to perform them. 'Life in Britain in the Fourteenth Century was 'nasty, brutish and short.'' This changed after 1348. We can see in the example of Farnham the immediate consequence of the plague: a slash in the cost of livestock and inflation in the cost of labour. This pattern was repeated up and down the country. The immediate reaction of the elite was to legislate against this. The Ordinance of Labourers was published on 18th June 1349, limiting the freedom of peasants to move around in search of the most lucrative work. This was promulgated through Parliament as the Statute of Labourers in 1351:

	28-11-2004 10:12									#12
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Reviewing history does it seem to any of you that the lower wages are the more freedom we have?

The Bushmen have very low "wages" and have more freedom than most people, does that help?

	28-11-2004 10:20									#13
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Oh yeah, if the Plague reduced population resulting in a labor shortage with a subsequent increase in wages and more "freedom", then that would explain the commies penchant for ridding society of those unfortunate souls too stupid to know they are slaves in the marketplace.

	28-11-2004 10:24									#14
	Put an end to popups!

on an international level, a nation whose economy is experiencing continual and acute labour shortages would be at a stark disadvantage compared to others because it will not operate anywhere near the optimal points on a ppf curve...

there could also be the problem that is prevalent in the third world and somewhat validates Malthus... the population may be huge and growing rapidly but too many people are children and not in the labour supply so they experience labour shortages and as a consequence can not sustain the large consumer population.

	28-11-2004 10:31									#15
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Berzerker The Bushmen have very low "wages" and have more freedom than most people, does that help?

Maybe you don't get it. When labor is in abundance there is no reason for slavery. When there is a shortage of labor rulers need slavery.

	28-11-2004 10:40									#16
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: When there is a shortage of labor rulers need slavery.

there was no shortage of labor in the Roman Republic/Empire of 100 BC-200 AD yet slavery was a major part of that economy. in fact, the Republic's collapse and the formation of the Empire was a result of the abundant slave labour replacing the previously equally abundant but more expensive wage labour and the former wage labourers becoming unemployed and joining the legions en masse.

from a strictly economic standpoint, a labour force that exceeds the productive capabilities of an economy will not be in that great of a demand so labour will be worth less and wages will be lower (eventually though, a use for that labour surplus will be made availible throught investment in new industries) if there is a shortage, however, obviously, labour will be in great demand so they'll get paid more or, if the powers that be are strong enough, will chain them to their work (slavery/serfdom)

the issue with colonial slavery was that it was difficult to get people to the colonies. workers in the English colonies were paid quite well because they were in short supply. the persistant lack of workers though, due to the difficulty in getting to the colonies, caused plantation owners to seek to import workers against their will instead of paying rare white workers high wages.

	28-11-2004 11:17									#17
	Re: Are labor supply and freedom related? Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Kidicious Does anyone agree or disagree with me? What will happen when the labor supply starts falling again? What would happen if we had another epidemic like the Black Death?

You need to take into consideration that technology has been improving productivity, so the reliance on cheap labour is reduced.

As for having another epidemic, I don't see it having too much effect, unless you think that the underclasses will be particularly badly hit.

	28-11-2004 11:20									#18
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Maybe you don't get it. When labor is in abundance there is no reason for slavery. When there is a shortage of labor rulers need slavery.

You ignored my point, are the Bushmen among the least free because their "wages" are very low? Why some ruler needs slavery is irrelevant, slavery is anti-thetical to freedom and the marketplace. Of course, you think we are enslaved when we are free to participate in that marketplace even if we don't agree with your opinion, but how are we free under your ideology? Communists don't believe in self-determination...

	28-11-2004 11:30									#19
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Albert Speer there was no shortage of labor in the Roman Republic/Empire of 100 BC-200 AD yet slavery was a major part of that economy. in fact, the Republic's collapse and the formation of the Empire was a result of the abundant slave labour replacing the previously equally abundant but more expensive wage labour and the former wage labourers becoming unemployed and joining the legions en masse.

There was a shortage of labor in the Roman Republic/Empire. Think about it. Slaves aren't free. At first they are cheap, but they get more expensive. Why would people pay for slaves when there are plenty of people to work for cheap wages?

Soldiers lost their land (had to sell it, because they couldn't take care of it). When they returned from war they became wage laboreres, and many or them eventually became serfs. That's how slavery ended in the Roman Empire. The slaves were too expensive, and there were plenty of people that would work for low wages.

quote: the issue with colonial slavery was that it was difficult to get people to the colonies. workers in the English colonies were paid quite well because they were in short supply. the persistant lack of workers though, due to the difficulty in getting to the colonies, caused plantation owners to seek to import workers against their will instead of paying rare white workers high wages.

Exactly

	28-11-2004 11:38									#20
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Berzerker You ignored my point, are the Bushmen among the least free because their "wages" are very low? Why some ruler needs slavery is irrelevant, slavery is anti-thetical to freedom and the marketplace. Of course, you think we are enslaved when we are free to participate in that marketplace even if we don't agree with your opinion, but how are we free under your ideology? Communists don't believe in self-determination...

A capitalist will do anything to either enslave his worker or hire him for low wages. High wages are not in his interest, and he will take action to change the situation. As long as the capitalist/(insert other ruler name here) has power over us, whether that be the power to whip us or hire us, we are not free.

	28-11-2004 13:27									#21
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: "As long as the capitalist has power over us, whether that be the power to whip us or hire us, we are not free." -Kidicious

Excellently subversive left-wing type-bite.

	28-11-2004 13:39									#22
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

That's good. I'm sure.

	28-11-2004 14:33									#23
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: A capitalist will do anything to either enslave his worker or hire him for low wages. High wages are not in his interest, and he will take action to change the situation. As long as the capitalist/(insert other ruler name here) has power over us, whether that be the power to whip us or hire us, we are not free.

And yet most people work for more than the minimum wage. Why is that? Because just as employers have incentives to be streamlined that include paying less if they can, employees also act out of their self-interest to get the highest wages they can. That's why people generally try to enhance their skills to find niches into which they can fit where labor supply is reduced and they can demand more pay.

Now, your definition of freedom is flawed. The reason we work is to buy the things we want, my employer is not responsible for my desires and you blame him for the constraints placed upon us by nature. Freedom is the absence of coercion or constraint on choice or action, not the coercion or constraints imposed upon us by nature, but by other people. We're only "free" from nature when we die...

Let's say there are two people in the world living in close proximty and they meet one day, I (the capitalist) might offer them something I have of value and they may have something of value I want. Bingo, the first action of a free market - that's capitalism at it's core. But you the Communist would be angry should this other person have more things that you value than he values of yours. This envy is the basis of your ideology just as "greed" is the basis of capitalism... Both can kill, that's why we limit what we can do out of greed and envy (murder, robbery) under capitalism, but not under communism - that's institutionalised murder and robbery. Envy is worse than greed because it is greed combined with a negative outlook on life. Greed is: "I've got mine and I'm happy, get your own". Envy is: "I want what you have because I'm unhappy"...

	28-11-2004 20:56									#24
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Berzerker You ignored my point, are the Bushmen among the least free because their "wages" are very low?

That's bollocks. For one thing, they don't have a capitalistic society and any comparison is thus flawed.

	28-11-2004 20:59									#25
	Tired of ads?

@Kid: As long as he has the power to hire you, you aren't free? So you'd be in favor of laws prohibiting people from hiring specifically you?

	28-11-2004 21:51									#26
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Berzerker And yet most people work for more than the minimum wage. Why is that? Because just as employers have incentives to be streamlined that include paying less if they can, employees also act out of their self-interest to get the highest wages they can. That's why people generally try to enhance their skills to find niches into which they can fit where labor supply is reduced and they can demand more pay.

The real median pay is about $12 an hour. So, at least half the people work for minimum wage or slightly above that. Yes, every worker trys to diferentiate himself/herself, but only some do, and a lot of those owe so much in college loans that they really make little over $12 an hour after their loan payments. And a lot of those people live in very high rent districts, another way the rulers get paid.

quote: Now, your definition of freedom is flawed. The reason we work is to buy the things we want, my employer is not responsible for my desires and you blame him for the constraints placed upon us by nature. Freedom is the absence of coercion or constraint on choice or action, not the coercion or constraints imposed upon us by nature, but by other people. We're only "free" from nature when we die...

What in the world makes you think the capitalist sytem is natural? There is nothing natural about a social system, because order is imposed upon us by others.

quote: Let's say there are two people in the world living in close proximty and they meet one day, I (the capitalist) might offer them something I have of value and they may have something of value I want. Bingo, the first action of a free market - that's capitalism at it's core. But you the Communist would be angry should this other person have more things that you value than he values of yours.

Such is the basis of a ruler/subject relationship. Throughout history those subjected to rule have 'agreed' to be the subject because they were in need of protection or economic resources. But are the rulers who have agreed to protect them in order to exploit them any better than those who would kill them?

	28-11-2004 21:56									#27
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by Kuciwalker @Kid: As long as he has the power to hire you, you aren't free? So you'd be in favor of laws prohibiting people from hiring specifically you?

I didn't mean prohibited. There's no reason to prohibit him from hiring me, if I don't need to work for him. He can hire me because he owns the means of production, and I don't.

	28-11-2004 22:35									#28
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Yes, well, given what you said, him not being able to hire you would make you free.

	28-11-2004 23:23									#29
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Kuciwalker Yes, well, given what you said, him not being able to hire you would make you free.

I used the word 'power.' When you control things than people need, you have power over them.

	28-11-2004 23:35									#30
	Remove this text

There is a certain degree of supply and demand that affects wage rates. But as you will notice, further up it seems to be more an issue of privilege...