What if: Every Job paid exactly $30/hour

[Ken_J]

Lets see if this corner of the internet is less disappointing. Here is a thought experiment.

All your costs of living are locked in where they are right now. They will never rise. Nor will they fall. It will cost you exactly what this month cost you, every month for the rest of your life.

Let's also assume then that no matter what work you do, IT for a multi-national or elementary school janitor, you get paid $30/hr.

What do you do? How many hours? What job or jobs do you want and which don't you want? why?

How would this change your region, country or the world?

Really think about it. You can do any job, and get paid 30/hr. So it doesn't matter monetarily what you do. But it will still matter to you what you do, for other reasons. What are those reasons? Remember that doctors and lawyers get the same pay as the kid stocking shelves at the grocery, so they don't have monetary prestige, but are doctors and lawyers still seen as better jobs than burger flipping or scrubbing toilets?

how would infrastructure be effected?

what do you think the effect on the military industrial complex and political systems would be?

Are there jobs we need done, that wouldn't get done because people couldn't be monetarily incentivised to do them when they could earn just as much at a dry cleaners? What does that say about what we pay those people now? What does that say about less important people contributing little to nothing and yet getting 300x that pay right now?

[SerethiaFalcon]

I'd do a combo of what I'm doing now, perhaps without as much stress if things fall through. Currently, I'm working a part-time cleaning job. I actually wanted to do a cleaning job because I'm pretty good at it, it'll take a little longer for robots to master than AI to master writing (due to the variety of tasks despite the repetition and the way things are set up - I'd imagine current robots would have a hard time cleaning wavy walls and pulling doors up and down, instead of in and out, especially with how finicky the doors can be), and I get exercise. I'm losing weight actually, which is what I need (albeit slowly). If that fell through, I'd look for some job where I could get my exercise in, preferably not eight hours per day though, due to the risk of injury. My current plan is to also continue developing my writing so that I eventually publish a book, and in the meantime, I'm thinking of starting a blog/entertainment project with some ideas I had (probably under my pseudonym). If I eventually developed that enough I could be making some money from it potentially, as I think my ideas would perhaps be interesting to some people. I don't think I'll ever go for a job that answers the phone or interacts with people heavily (such as a manager or something else along that line). I've discovered a lot about myself from my previous job, for example, the events industry is a headache because you can be working 60 plus hours some weeks due to events, and fewer other weeks. I was okay at the lighting on the stage, but I didn't do great at audio mixing. Also, I absolutely hated getting in front of an entire audience to fix something on stage. I much prefer to be in the background. The two things I know I'm good at are cleaning and writing. Scheduling is something I'm also good at, but I hate answering the phone. Other than that, I'd assume I'd be decent at coming up with creative ideas (though perhaps not all the time). I'm also pretty passionate about gaming (and creating), so due to my passion, I could probably pursue a low-key entertainment/development line of work down the road. Part of that would be getting into the modding aspect of gaming. I've especially become interested in randomizing games through modding. To me, that has limitless potential, even if eventually AI tools are mostly used.

In terms of others, I'd imagine everyone is different. Low-level jobs may suffer for sure, as well as boring jobs, etc. But there will always be some who do the job, especially if it is part-time and they are flexible to some degree. I definitely think it would increase job satisfaction as people would pursue their passions or things they want to do rather than something they don't want to do. However, for those who had been paid more, I'd imagine it would be deflating and they would probably mostly drop out if the money isn't there (unless they are really passionate). That could be a negative thing for doctors, lawyers, etc. But, maybe it would be a good thing too. I don't know. I guess the focus might shift from how much money they get to how much power/prestige they hold in a position. The question is, would that only be tied to money then? Is the only reason for the power and prestige in a job due to pay rate? It would be interesting to find out.

Also, I'd expect the first year after this change to be a huge shake-up. A lot of people would either switch jobs or stay at home. Eventually, though, the rough edges would start to disappear as everyone found their niche. I'd expect most jobs to shift their approach to a more flexible situation, possibly turning to part-time if they couldn't keep people when it was a full-time job, but, who knows?

[Ken_J]

saw some data today:

US total personal income (not other wealth or any other monies taken into account) was 19.6 trillion in 2020.
population aged 15-64, 213.6 mil according to census.gov,
$92k per working-age person per year.

that's about $7600 a month. and if you use 4.33 weeks per month as a standard, about 1700 a week.

If you figure that's divided up into 60 hour weeks (not 40, which is what usually is counted as full time in the US) that's about $29/hr.

Soooo, without redistributing already accumulated wealth, raising any costs of goods or services, cutting hours or workers, or any other shinanigans, simply setting things at $29/hr. those that work 60 hours a week would get 92k a year. those that work 40 hours a week would get 60k a year. and a student, single mother or a person with disabilities could work 20 hours a week and get 30k a year.

[Tadasuke]

People would be disincentivized to do jobs which require too much learning or are too hard or unpleasant for them. It would lower GDP for sure. But it would be better for the majority of people if median salary was closer to the average salary.

[R8Z]

Fixed prices incentivize the mediocre while discouraging the exceptional. This is in any industry, for any resource in the human world we live in. From these two statements you can already guess it wouldn't be a good idea in our current society. Maybe automation and AI would change it somehow, but I find it unlikely.

Anyway, as for myself: I'd work in the least-amount-of-work position I could possibly find and try to do some hobby things on the side on company time. Being lazy by nature would not do me much good in this society neither would do any better for society itself.

[Nanotechandmorefuture]

We would be in serious trouble because the robots may come quicker than usual so if UBI and all that ain't there then what? The prices for everything else would also be an issue lol.

[TanishaTanTan]

Lets see if this corner of the internet is less disappointing. Here is a thought experiment.

All your costs of living are locked in where they are right now. They will never rise. Nor will they fall. It will cost you exactly what this month cost you, every month for the rest of your life.

Let's also assume then that no matter what work you do, IT for a multi-national or elementary school janitor, you get paid $30/hr.

What do you do? How many hours? What job or jobs do you want and which don't you want? why?

How would this change your region, country or the world?

Really think about it. You can do any job, and get paid 30/hr. So it doesn't matter monetarily what you do. But it will still matter to you what you do, for other reasons. What are those reasons? Remember that doctors and lawyers get the same pay as the kid stocking shelves at the grocery, so they don't have monetary prestige, but are doctors and lawyers still seen as better jobs than burger flipping or scrubbing toilets?

how would infrastructure be effected?

what do you think the effect on the military industrial complex and political systems would be?

Are there jobs we need done, that wouldn't get done because people couldn't be monetarily incentivised to do them when they could earn just as much at a dry cleaners? What does that say about what we pay those people now? What does that say about less important people contributing little to nothing and yet getting 300x that pay right now?

In a world where every job pays the same $30 an hour, public consciousness can change dramatically. In such a reality, people will choose a job not because of a monetary incentive, but based on their interests, skills and aspirations. Just recently I studied the issue of career goals and other things. The prestige of professions related to higher education may decrease, as earnings will not be an attraction factor. However, people will be more eager to do what they consider meaningful and satisfying to their needs. Perhaps this will lead to a revision of the educational system and the recognition of the importance of all kinds of professions. Presumably, some low-paid but important professions, such as cleaners and orderlies, will become more attractive to society and their status will rise.

[Solaris]

Very easy answer. I would be a twitch streamer. Since everyone gets paid the same per hour, it must mean that skills, effort, talent and ever other characteristics that differentiate people in the labor market does not matter. In that way, I'm only obligated to stream, therefore turning the camera on. I would therefore stream 24 hours a day earning the maximum amount of salary possible for a human being with only one job. I would have two options, get a second job which I would stream on twitch earning more than 720 dollars/day, probably something that also allows passive work. Second option would to just live life while streaming. I assume that you can only have one job at a time, otherwise I would jail break the concept by maximising the amount of jobs I could have. I also assume that everyone starts at 0 dollars, otherwise the economy would be broken with no ability to climb up or down the ladder. With those assumptions fulfilled, I would be the richest man in the world.

In long run equilibrium everyone in the world that acts rational will think the same way I do choosing the work that requires the least amount of work creating a society that do not function as intended unless it is fully automated.

[Ken_J]

Very easy answer. I would be a twitch streamer. Since everyone gets paid the same per hour, it must mean that skills, effort, talent and ever other characteristics that differentiate people in the labor market does not matter. In that way, I'm only obligated to stream, therefore turning the camera on. I would therefore stream 24 hours a day earning the maximum amount of salary possible for a human being with only one job. I would have two options, get a second job which I would stream on twitch earning more than 720 dollars/day, probably something that also allows passive work. Second option would to just live life while streaming. I assume that you can only have one job at a time, otherwise I would jail break the concept by maximising the amount of jobs I could have. I also assume that everyone starts at 0 dollars, otherwise the economy would be broken with no ability to climb up or down the ladder. With those assumptions fulfilled, I would be the richest man in the world.

In long run equilibrium everyone in the world that acts rational will think the same way I do choosing the work that requires the least amount of work creating a society that do not function as intended unless it is fully automated.

I would say you missed that part where a paid job is not the same thing as an activity you get paid for. The though experiment is essentially like a mandatory minimum wage and a mandatory maximum wage. It's not really a matter of saying that I as an artist will get paid 30$ by some external entity for each hour I do my painting in. I might keep track of my hours I paint and use that as the basis for my painting prices, but nobody is obligated to buy them and that variability in sales would make selling my work not a paid job in the labor market. Jobs are things where the employer and employee are usually two different people, but in some cases like an owner operated bussiness the minimum wage for the employees is 30, and the maximum for them and the owner or ceo is 30/hour.
you can stack as many jobs as you want provided that you don't get fired for substandard work in any one of them or fail to do your job because you were doing other work (like I could imagine being an online tutor while doing night security at a auto dealership or something, but they day you have a stolen car or a broken window happen on your shift because becky doesn't understand fractions, or you ditch a student on their one hour with you to chase off some homeless drunk pissing on the cars... you lose a job and earn a blacklisting from those jobs for you misconduct). You can also make arts and crafted items and run bake sales all you want and sell them outside of the job environment. to your hearts content. do your security and knit blankets you sell on etsy. tutor in math while doing a kiln run of home made pottery.

I think you are also over generalizing that everybody would take the easy jobs. Not only is there not enough news anchor positions to let everyone do that, but I think people knowing that they can find the same pay rate to support themselves and their family anywhere would allow them to not worry about being able to survive and support a family if they fail in a career or have to leave for a while to take care of a sick parent or relocate to a new place without job openings in the same trade. I think we saw during the pandemic, plenty of people despise having to sit at home baking bread or learning to knit without some kind of meaningful work to participate in. and if you knew you could earn the same amount from any job and it would be enough to support you and your family you could work towards the skills you need to get a job that means something to you. do you love animals and feel like you would find being a Vet the most rewarding career? cool you can get paid 30/hr anywhere while you go to school for becoming a vet, and then get paid the same 30/hr to do a job you actually want to do. Finding work that is meaningful beyond how much you make from it is easier when you can make the same doing anything.

I know I'd not waste my time working as a filler jobs for 30/hr if I could earn the same amount from doing something I love regardless of whether I get paid for it.

the point of this is to take the reward out of the pay check difference and find out what would be rewarding for you as work when the monetary reward was standard across all.

[Solaris]

Very easy answer. I would be a twitch streamer. Since everyone gets paid the same per hour, it must mean that skills, effort, talent and ever other characteristics that differentiate people in the labor market does not matter. In that way, I'm only obligated to stream, therefore turning the camera on. I would therefore stream 24 hours a day earning the maximum amount of salary possible for a human being with only one job. I would have two options, get a second job which I would stream on twitch earning more than 720 dollars/day, probably something that also allows passive work. Second option would to just live life while streaming. I assume that you can only have one job at a time, otherwise I would jail break the concept by maximising the amount of jobs I could have. I also assume that everyone starts at 0 dollars, otherwise the economy would be broken with no ability to climb up or down the ladder. With those assumptions fulfilled, I would be the richest man in the world.

In long run equilibrium everyone in the world that acts rational will think the same way I do choosing the work that requires the least amount of work creating a society that do not function as intended unless it is fully automated.

I would say you missed that part where a paid job is not the same thing as an activity you get paid for. The though experiment is essentially like a mandatory minimum wage and a mandatory maximum wage. It's not really a matter of saying that I as an artist will get paid 30$ by some external entity for each hour I do my painting in. I might keep track of my hours I paint and use that as the basis for my painting prices, but nobody is obligated to buy them and that variability in sales would make selling my work not a paid job in the labor market. Jobs are things where the employer and employee are usually two different people, but in some cases like an owner operated bussiness the minimum wage for the employees is 30, and the maximum for them and the owner or ceo is 30/hour.
you can stack as many jobs as you want provided that you don't get fired for substandard work in any one of them or fail to do your job because you were doing other work (like I could imagine being an online tutor while doing night security at a auto dealership or something, but they day you have a stolen car or a broken window happen on your shift because becky doesn't understand fractions, or you ditch a student on their one hour with you to chase off some homeless drunk pissing on the cars... you lose a job and earn a blacklisting from those jobs for you misconduct). You can also make arts and crafted items and run bake sales all you want and sell them outside of the job environment. to your hearts content. do your security and knit blankets you sell on etsy. tutor in math while doing a kiln run of home made pottery.

I think you are also over generalizing that everybody would take the easy jobs. Not only is there not enough news anchor positions to let everyone do that, but I think people knowing that they can find the same pay rate to support themselves and their family anywhere would allow them to not worry about being able to survive and support a family if they fail in a career or have to leave for a while to take care of a sick parent or relocate to a new place without job openings in the same trade. I think we saw during the pandemic, plenty of people despise having to sit at home baking bread or learning to knit without some kind of meaningful work to participate in. and if you knew you could earn the same amount from any job and it would be enough to support you and your family you could work towards the skills you need to get a job that means something to you. do you love animals and feel like you would find being a Vet the most rewarding career? cool you can get paid 30/hr anywhere while you go to school for becoming a vet, and then get paid the same 30/hr to do a job you actually want to do. Finding work that is meaningful beyond how much you make from it is easier when you can make the same doing anything.

I know I'd not waste my time working as a filler jobs for 30/hr if I could earn the same amount from doing something I love regardless of whether I get paid for it.

the point of this is to take the reward out of the pay check difference and find out what would be rewarding for you as work when the monetary reward was standard across all.

Okay, that does change things. Then I would not work in the labor market at all, and just be a freerider (or a criminal if taxes are not redistributed to the citizens). It's probably against your thought experiment, so I won't write why it makes sense to not work in the labor market, unless you want me to.

In terms of over generalising, there are exceptions, but in generel I think it was true before (that is since wages are fixed there is no reason to work above minimal effort. Even if someone had noble causes or pleasure in their work, in the long run people would work the bare minimum, since effort is not rewarded concentrating people on occupations that requires least effort). With the way you have specified the rules in the latest post, I actually don't know what would occur in the long run. If I took your rules at face value, I would probably also work in a profession I could consider myself being most happy doing, since the rules are designed for you to think to come to that conclusion. We could say I would just pick the profession I would be happy doing, and disregard the issues associated with it.