> That's the position that you are taking with respect to migrants from developing countries. An "exploitative" job in the Swedish economy would be a big upgrade from their options back home, yet you still deny it to them out of a high-minded sense of "altruism".
I am an immigrant from a developing country, living in Sweden, gladly I've been here long enough to also be a citizen. I'm extremely glad there are provisions which did not allow employers to exploit me when I was hired, I'm glad I was paid in line with what natives/locals were.
There's no altruism in allowing exploitation of immigrants, it seems you are not considering that allowing it also creates a counterpoint that depresses salaries of locals since there's a pool of labour willing (and allowed to) to be paid less for the same skillset and competence, your prerogative is, ultimately, mostly beneficial to employers while leaving breadcrumbs to immigrants, and depressing local salaries.
>I am an immigrant from a developing country, living in Sweden, gladly I've been here long enough to also be a citizen. I'm extremely glad there are provisions which did not allow employers to exploit me when I was hired, I'm glad I was paid in line with what natives/locals were.
Easy for you to say, given that you actually got a job. That's how these labor restrictions work: they're nice if you can find a job, but they create an underclass of people who can't find one.
> Easy for you to say, given that you actually got a job. That's how these labor restrictions work: they're nice if you can find a job, but they create an underclass of people who can't find one.
No restrictions in the labour market will create lots of exploitative behaviour, it will depress wages, I simply don't understand how you do not understand this, even more since you were the one citing "microeconomics" further up in the thread.
You are advocating for labour exploitation, paying people less than what's fair due to their desperation, not based on their merits and a level playing field to all. You are actively advocating for this. Don't you see any reasons a society does not want to allow that to creep into the labour market?
If Jack only produces $8/hr worth of value through his labor, and the government says employers must pay Jack $10/hr or more, Jack won't be able to get a job.
Minimum wage laws encourage employers to trim the least productive workers from their payroll. The least productive workers are disproportionately the poorly educated, those suffering from health conditions, etc. Minimum wage laws hurt those who are least able to advocate for themselves.
"Exploitation" and "fairness" are a matter of opinion. There's no objective way to define that stuff.
There's no minimum wage in Sweden determined by the government through laws. I thought you had understood that, unsure why you are bringing minimum wage laws in a discussion about the Nordic model in Sweden.
I am an immigrant from a developing country, living in Sweden, gladly I've been here long enough to also be a citizen. I'm extremely glad there are provisions which did not allow employers to exploit me when I was hired, I'm glad I was paid in line with what natives/locals were.
There's no altruism in allowing exploitation of immigrants, it seems you are not considering that allowing it also creates a counterpoint that depresses salaries of locals since there's a pool of labour willing (and allowed to) to be paid less for the same skillset and competence, your prerogative is, ultimately, mostly beneficial to employers while leaving breadcrumbs to immigrants, and depressing local salaries.