58
submitted 7 months ago by booja@booja.ca to c/canada@lemmy.ca
top 13 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] TheAgeOfSuperboredom@lemmy.ca 38 points 7 months ago
[-] nyan@lemmy.cafe 7 points 7 months ago

Indeed. Where's that pic of the tardigrade with the violin again?

[-] swordgeek@lemmy.ca 27 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

The news here isn't that companies will actually have to pay their employees (marginally) more.

It's that being forced to pay employees a slightly larger fraction of what they would have made a decade ago is considered the "top risk to the economy."

Read that again. "Paying employees is the top risk to the economy."

This is why capitalism needs to be burned to the ground.

[-] skozzii@lemmy.ca 5 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

"This is why capitalism needs to be burned to the ground."

Say it again louder for those in the back!

Capitalism has become literally the cause of almost all of our problems in this age. Billionaires should not exist.

[-] baconisaveg@lemmy.ca 0 points 7 months ago

Read that again. “Paying employees is the top risk to the economy.”

That shouldn't really be surprising to anyone though. Employees are a huge expense.

If my rent goes up, or the cost of groceries keeps going up, that's a huge risk to my financials as well. Yet no one expects me to just roll over and take it, I'll look for a new place with lower rent, even it if means downsizing, and I'll look for lower priced food items or even cut specific foods from my shopping list. And this is while I keep on spending my disposable income/entertainment budget, and putting money into my RRSP/TFSA, and keeping money in a savings account in case of an emergency. Just because I have reserves doesn't mean I want to pay more for rent or food.

Companies are no different. Can you explain to me how it makes good financial sense when I do it, but when a company does it people freak out (even though they have no valid alternatives)?

[-] TerkErJerbs@lemm.ee 19 points 7 months ago
[-] dlpkl@lemmy.world 15 points 7 months ago

I'm taking this to mean that more money is ending up in the hands on banks and landlords, not that the employees have more exposable income.

[-] nik282000@lemmy.ca 8 points 7 months ago

What we’re seeing in the survey is that the businesses are needing to pay more to enable their workers to absorb these higher costs of living.

Could have fooled me.

[-] tpihkal@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago
[-] cyberpunk007@lemmy.ca 3 points 7 months ago

Didn't we all know this like nearly a decade ago?

[-] swordgeek@lemmy.ca 7 points 7 months ago

Didn’t we all know this like nearly ~~a decade~~ THREE CENTURIES ago?

FTFY

[-] folkrav@lemmy.ca 5 points 7 months ago

more PPP and lower pay is their answer to the crisis lol

[-] Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works 2 points 7 months ago

Nah man, that’s just the demand for Canadian living increasing. Hence you need to pay more for something that is more in demand (Canadian worker).

Seriously, can someone point to any instance where free market dynamics were good for workers and the owner class didn’t cry about it?

this post was submitted on 27 Mar 2024
58 points (98.3% liked)

Canada

7187 readers
400 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Universities


💵 Finance / Shopping


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social and Culture


Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS