[knollimar]

Increased capital investment (e.g. software) could explain productivity not attributable to the employee.

On its face, productivity vs pay isn't a faor metric. I agree that problem exists, but we shouldn't use it to benchmark

[Herring]

> I own your tools therefore I own everything you do with them

Like I said, madness.

It's like slavery was technically outlawed but a lot of America strongly disagreed. And they're posting on HN.

[knollimar]

If I lease tools that triple your productivity for the same cost as your wage, how much more do I pay you?

My point is increases in productivity can be caused by capital investment, not totally attributable to the worker. That money has to come from somewhere.

Ideally there's a fair balance. This isn't it but you can't look at the number you referenced blindly.

[Herring]

You're not thinking at a systems level. Check this out - https://data.worldhappiness.report/chart. The US is increasingly a miserable place to live in - in large part because of pay not keeping up with housing/school/medical/etc.

Correct systems-level answer to your question "how much do I pay you" is "as much as it takes to stabilize the US curve". Happiness correlates with financial security, which we won't get if the rich get richer from those capital investments then buy up all the housing.

Fun fact: Fit 2 lines on that data and you can extrapolate by ~2030 China will be a better place to live. That's really not that far off. Set a reminder on your phone.