Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by smatija 516 days ago
In Slovenia also good service in (affordable) restaurants and cafés became scarce.

Here at least it's easy to see why though: 20-30 years ago most of service staff went to catering vocational schools (and work as server was seen as reputable career), while today majority of serving work is done by part-time students (and work in service is seen as deadend job).

1 comments

My guess is that employers wanted cheaper part time staff?
My guess is that customers wanted cheaper food and drinks?

It is well documented that operating cafes and restaurants is among the lowest probability avenues for becoming rich, and highest probability avenues for the business failing.

This is most likely a consequence of demographics and excessive rent seeking. Labor prices go up, and people are only able or willing to pay so much for food service before deciding it is better to do it themselves.

It's pretty clear there that half of the problem was caused by liberalization of student work, while other half (urban rents) was mostly consequence of horrendously irresponsible way that privatized social (not public) property through Jazbinšek law.

    excessive rent seeking
What is excessive rent seeking? Isn't rent based on supply and demand?
When spaces in urban areas stay empty for years on end, that is excessive rent seeking.

When a person wanting to start a business chooses not to because there is a 90%+ chance all their efforts will result in most of the profit going to the landlord when the lease renewal comes up, that is excessive rent seeking (most visible as only franchise or chain restaurants opening).

When young people in the bottom two income quintiles can see they will never be able to save enough (because of spending their money on rent and higher prices paid to businesses that are paying rents) to afford buying a place of their own, so they forgo pursuing goals of forming families, that is excessive rent seeking.

How is spaces staying empty related to rent seeking? It seems the opposite? If they stay empty, there is no rent.

The other two points seem to be about the price level, not about "seeking"? Do you suggest owners of buildings should rent out their buildings below the market price?

An empty space in an urban area is always a cost to the public, by way of providing zero utility, yet everyone having to expend time and energy to commute around it. The owner is squatting on it, waiting for other people to work to make the surrounding area more desirable, at which point they can enjoy the higher rents.

Basically, the owner gets something for nothing, which is tantamount to rent seeking.

Of course, and liberalization of student work let them get that. At the "small" cost of worsening a large part of job pool and custumer experience.