Some of the ideas discussed below might be borrowed from different works.
Origin of pay
-------------
When we talk about pay, we can not talk in isolation, because the very practice of exchanging money for services came into existence for improved cooperation in society; Improved cooperation can be understood from the principle of division of labor. When society splits work and allow each and every individual to concentrate on a few things improved dexterity on each task is achieved. If a society works in a way where everyone is forced to do everything from agriculture to building bridges, the level of maturity in each and every task that we have today would not have been possible and that common sense gave way to the birth of money. The primary purpose of currency is to trade each others services. Understandably, depending on difficulties entailed in each services the money worth of those services would differ. For example, the amount of money we are willing to pay for rice and corn is not the same. Because, the fact of cultivating rice is harder than cultivating corn.
Arguments for existence of the lower bound on pay in a morally well formed society
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When individuals in a society benefit from each other, directly or indirectly, the indicator for the wellness of a functioning society can be inferred from the number of people struggle for survival even when they offer some service that is needed for the functioning of the society. Meeting basic needs for survival is a fundamental expectation of any individual who offers portion of his/her life hours for the services needed by the society. Any work that is not needed by a society currently or in future need not be considered for our discussion as we try to understand the role of a society in assigning the worth of each work.
In those lines, A good society should be able to fulfill the basic survival needs of those individuals who offer any needed service; Independent of nature of the work they do, there exists a basic money value for which everyone has the right to expect and get. Here comes, the definition of exploitation, Exploitation is nothing but getting services from people without giving back the worth of their work. Exploitation works as it feeds on desperation of people; that desperation need not just be money.
Misconception 1
----------------
For example, when we are locked up in a room for a few days without food by Mr X, after a few days we would accept food offered even by Mr X. The act of accepting the food by us does not mean whatever Mr X did to us was right. In the same lines, just the act of accepting pay by anyone for any service, is not an indicator of the fairness.
If we are accepting any service from anyone in a society, without paying the worth of their work, then we are Mr X or at least the cousins of Mr X.
Figuring out the Lower bound
------------------------------
From my previous arguments, there exists a lower bound independent of the nature or work. Realizing the existence of lower bound is difficult than quantifying it. To quantify the lower bound, When we are using someone's service for x hours (In case of time driven services) then he/she should be paid atleast (what is needed for the basic needs of the family for a month) * x/160.
160 - working hours per month
Basic needs- food, cloths, shelter, Education.
The quality of the work should only result in change from the lower bound in the positive direction.
I feel now it is easy to see our paycheck does not reflect the intrinsic worth of what we are doing.
In those lines, A good society should be able to fulfill the basic survival needs of those individuals who offer any needed service; Independent of nature of the work they do, there exists a basic money value for which everyone has the right to expect and get. Here comes, the definition of exploitation, Exploitation is nothing but getting services from people without giving back the worth of their work. Exploitation works as it feeds on desperation of people; that desperation need not just be money.
Misconception 1
----------------
For example, when we are locked up in a room for a few days without food by Mr X, after a few days we would accept food offered even by Mr X. The act of accepting the food by us does not mean whatever Mr X did to us was right. In the same lines, just the act of accepting pay by anyone for any service, is not an indicator of the fairness.
If we are accepting any service from anyone in a society, without paying the worth of their work, then we are Mr X or at least the cousins of Mr X.
Figuring out the Lower bound
------------------------------
From my previous arguments, there exists a lower bound independent of the nature or work. Realizing the existence of lower bound is difficult than quantifying it. To quantify the lower bound, When we are using someone's service for x hours (In case of time driven services) then he/she should be paid atleast (what is needed for the basic needs of the family for a month) * x/160.
160 - working hours per month
Basic needs- food, cloths, shelter, Education.
The quality of the work should only result in change from the lower bound in the positive direction.
I feel now it is easy to see our paycheck does not reflect the intrinsic worth of what we are doing.
