[soccerdave]

Didn’t read the article, but why would you go work at a lower end job when you can make 80-90% of what you would make by just collecting unemployment benefits?

I personally know at least 2 people that admitted this and said they would wait until unemployment benefits expire to seek work.

[ChuckNorris89]

Same in Germany and Austria. Local farmers complain about a shortage of fruit pickers in the season even though there are plenty of able bodied unemployed locals with no skills or degrees but since they have the option of staying on unemployment, why would they do back-breaking work for 10-20% more money then what they get paid for sleeping in at home?

So they just import and abuse poor workers from Eastern Europe[1] living and working in illegal conditions, who have no better options back home than to do back-breaking work for what would be peanuts in Germany but somewhat-half-decent money back home.

The local authorities know about these illegalities regarding foreign worker exploitation but turn a blind eye as this keeps the meat and vegetables cheap in the supermarkets for the very price sensitive local consumers, since the farmers are all under the pressure of the big supermarket chains to deliver produce on time and on razor thin margins so they have no other way but to find cheap exploitable workforce to stay competitive or lose their contracts.

Welcome to 21st century European capitalism.

[1]https://youtu.be/OUiFYhVEUvU

[CodeGlitch]

Yes exactly the same happened in the UK pre-brexit. Now we have left I wonder if the situation will change much (I suspect not).

[lumost]

Why don't companies pay more then? In Switzerland service employees make 20-35 dollars an hour. Is there some intrinsic reason why employers feel compelled to pay so little?

[sunpar]

Switzerland is also one of the most expensive places in the world. As is NYC, where I live and the minimum wage is $15/hour and service jobs paying between $20-$35 is not unusual.

In the US, there are also places where the minimum wage is $7.50 (the federal minimum wage) and things also cost far less. The US in general is a much more diverse place than a place like Switzerland, and yet it’s all governed by the same federal law, which paid expanded unemployment benefits the same regardless of where the person is located.

[logicchains]

>Is there some intrinsic reason why employers feel compelled to pay so little?

The average US small-business owner makes around $70k/year, less than most devs: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/28/this-is-how-much-to-pay-your... . It's not like small business are rolling in cash. The only way for them to pay more is either to raise prices (meaning everything costs more) or hire fewer people. Would you be willing to patronise a shop that charges 50% more for coffee than the shop next to it because it pays its workers more? I'd bet not.

Switzerland is a very rich country, so all wages are higher; shops can afford to pay more.

[plater]

In Switzerland the cost of living is also >50% higher than other western European countries. Housing is even 100% higher. Service employees in Switzerland come mainly from Germany, France, Portugal, Brazil etc.

[baggy_trough]

Presumably the market price for their products doesn't support profitability at some higher rate.

[dahfizz]

Unemployment scales with how much money you used to make. In my state, you can receive the equivalent of $31/hr on unemployment.

[gher-shyu3i]

They can't afford to. This is the natural outcome of running businesses on loans.

[fatnoah]

>Didn’t read the article, but why would you go work at a lower end job when you can make 80-90% of what you would make by just collecting unemployment benefits?

I think you wouldn't. A family member runs a small shop and unemployment plus additional COVID benefits ended up being very close to wages of some employees, who did the math and decided that 90% of the pay for 5% (not zero due to expectations for unemployment) of the work.

[6gvONxR4sf7o]

> Didn’t read the article, but why would you go work at a lower end job when you can make 80-90% of what you would make by just collecting unemployment benefits?

There’s a good article somewhere that looks into that specific question and provides some data and weighs alternative explanations. I wish I could find the link.

Alternatively we could all just debate it without any of the data from the article. I’m pretty sure I know which option is most popular.

[6gvONxR4sf7o]

You’re getting downvoted to hell, but it really is a let-me-google-that-for-you kind of question, given what the article presents. It’s frustrating to see so much discussion going that way.

[blacktriangle]

And yet people still think UBI will work.

[freedomben]

Unemployment isn't UBI. If you work you lose the unemployment money you would have got for free, hence the disincentive. UBI (most proposals) would supplement work not replace it.

[breakfastduck]

UBI isn't even remotely comparable to employment benefit.

You stop getting the benefit if you get a job, you wouldn't stop getting UBI, so there's no negative response to being employed.

[sigspec]

Sounds like you misunderstand the point of UBI.

[Tarrosion]

UBI seems very different? You lose unemployment benefits if you start working; you wouldn't lose UBI benefits.

[Maxion]

Just look at the Nordic countries, very good unemployment benefits but we do not have any issues with people staying on benefits even if they could get a good paying job.

A UBI that works as e.g. a negative income tax would definitely work.