why don't we just let algorithms determine our salaries?

[RidonKs]

like in each industry, for each profession, just put all the data into a specified algorithm and whatever number pops out is how much you make. figure out a way to input progress reports for raises down the road and you're gold.

not saying it'd be easy to come up with the formulas but it seems like an awful lot better than negotiations between 'natural entities'.

[UK2K]

like in each industry, for each profession, just put all the data into a specified algorithm and whatever number pops out is how much you make. figure out a way to input progress reports for raises down the road and you're gold.

not saying it'd be easy to come up with the formulas but it seems like an awful lot better than negotiations between 'natural entities'.

Algorithms can't predict declining due to age or attitude. Lance had a great season the year before last, but nobody wants to deal with his shitty demeanor. If an algorithm determined his salary, nobody would have picked him up.

[sweggeh]

Thats dumb. Salaries would still be changed to match the competition. Plus every situation is different, and every employer has their own financial model which includes how much they are willing to spend on salaries. There is no one salary that fits everyone. There are way too many variables to have a "one fits all" salary.

This is just straight stupid. Delete this thread immediately.

[RidonKs]

you guys think you'd get paid less, don't you?

[STATUTORY]

who would be in charge of designing this algorithm?

[UK2K]

you guys think you'd get paid less, don't you?

Hire for attitude, train for skill.

I landed a job that requires a college degree, without a college degree. Attitude and work ethic can't exactly be quantified.

[RidonKs]

Hire for attitude, train for skill.

I landed a job that requires a college degree, without a college degree. Attitude and work ethic can't exactly be quantified.

this is absolutely true. but i'd say to stick around at most jobs require attitude and work ethic. you hire for attitude, you fire for attitude. but you offer raises on the basis of value which can be quantified by definition. then we build our turing machine and we're good to go!

[Nick Young]

As much money as we can muster should go to the government. The government can be trusted to deliver that money back to the people who deserve it most, while giving less to the greedy misers who are only in the spot their are due to imperialist privilege.


Our salaries will not matter as long as our government takes care of us. In the country I live in, Europe, the government does everything it can to equalize everyone. That is why Europe is the best country in the world right now.

[DonD13]

my government provides a web-interface for that

you put in age, industry, location, education, experience, job and so on it gives you the average, the median and different percentiles

i always have a look on that before a job interview

but your idea to just let a machine determine your salary is super naive, just like all your other stupid threads

[iamgine]

It could be useful for specific manual labor jobs.

Not for all industries though.

[Clifton]

I'm a big believer in the family wage.

The primary income earner in a household (customarily the man of the house, but that could be adapted for today for single mothers, etc etc) is paid enough to support himself and his family in moderate comfort, with benefits and a plan for retirement.

So, the bigger the family, the more he is paid. (Because he needs more money than someone who doesn't have a family.) People who aren't working to provide for a family (customarily, women) are paid less.

Needless to say, it's considered discrimination now. I think it's too bad. Many companies used to do this voluntarily (it was never a law or anything).

By the way, this doesn't just apply to middle managers on up. This is anyone who works full time and has a family. Even if he works in a factory, he's making $40k a year, plus bonuses for kids.

Now, nobody makes enough money, except doctors and lawyers and money people and a few other professions, who make too much. I don't understand it, but that's what we've got.

[UK2K]

As much money as we can muster should go to the government. The government can be trusted to deliver that money back to the people who deserve it most, while giving less to the greedy misers who are only in the spot their are due to imperialist privilege.


Our salaries will not matter as long as our government takes care of us. In the country I live in, Europe, the government does everything it can to equalize everyone. That is why Europe is the best country in the world right now.

Why should I be equal to someone who sacrifices less than I do to get where I am.

[Nick Young]

Why should I be equal to someone who sacrifices less than I do to get where I am.

You are only where you are due to imperialist privilege that you inherited. If anything, you should be made LESS equal than those who are born with less privilege than you had.

This is how things are in my country, Europe. Everyone has everything they need. A capitalist system leads to oppression and misogyny.

[Bandito]

As much money as we can muster should go to the government. The government can be trusted to deliver that money back to the people who deserve it most, while giving less to the greedy misers who are only in the spot their are due to imperialist privilege.


Our salaries will not matter as long as our government takes care of us. In the country I live in, Europe, the government does everything it can to equalize everyone. That is why Europe is the best country in the world right now.

Europe is not a country. But a collection of countries.

[ISHGoat]

I'm a big believer in the family wage.

The primary income earner in a household (customarily the man of the house, but that could be adapted for today for single mothers, etc etc) is paid enough to support himself and his family in moderate comfort, with benefits and a plan for retirement.

So, the bigger the family, the more he is paid. (Because he needs more money than someone who doesn't have a family.) People who aren't working to provide for a family (customarily, women) are paid less.

Needless to say, it's considered discrimination now. I think it's too bad. Many companies used to do this voluntarily (it was never a law or anything).

By the way, this doesn't just apply to middle managers on up. This is anyone who works full time and has a family. Even if he works in a factory, he's making $40k a year, plus bonuses for kids.

Now, nobody makes enough money, except doctors and lawyers and money people and a few other professions, who make too much. I don't understand it, but that's what we've got.

good in principal, but youll have people that will abuse the system by spawning countless kids.