How can the majority of people in a country be fully employed if ?

[CodenamePliskin]

Ive reposted my comment here to open up debate on the questions here :

How can the majority of people in a country be fully employed if every company is run for profit and or includes public sector, charities, not-for profit organisations ?

There is only so much that companies can achieve and still make profits. So, what do we do with the rest of the people when it's not profitable?

How can we achieve almost full employment in any given country when there are only so many people needed?

Furthermore, if companies don't have the resources to pay proper wages, how can society improve within a capitalist system?

Your question assumes that people only work for companies. What about the public sector, charities, not-for profit organisations?

thanks, edited it to include these

You also overlook that fact that healthy companies grow and expand their workforce. Companies don’t normally achieve a particular size and then stay like that ad infinitum.

its locked the editing but much appricated

The goal shouldn’t be to get all or almost all people fully employed in paid work. That’s not a solution for a strong economy, happy populace, progress etc.

For example, if we had no adult students at a universities, we’d be regressing as a society. Adult students are not fully employed in paid work.

The goal should be to have fewer and fewer people needed for full employment to get a decent standard of living for all.

We need to move towards replacing human labour with robots and AI, then providing a UBI so humans can pursue whatever work they want to do without work that generates profit being prioritised,

We could advance so much faster in medicine and other sciences, the arts, on things like world peace and ending hunger if there was no need to make money or to prioritise work that makes money.

The public sector thing is huge. The ONS reports nearly 6 million public sector employees, funded by tax.

Another factor is the international market. Our companies and employees don’t just generate profit from UK customers; they also serve other countries which adds to the profit generated by this country (and is why international trad is so important). Our profits are therefore not limited by the UK consumer base.

At least public sector workers are cheaper than private for same amount of work. Lower salaries and no profit to give to shareholders.

I'm not sure that's the case. There are lots of poorly paid entry level private sector jobs in retail, hospitality etc. Public sector jobs are often better paid with better pensions.

😂 er, not for donkeys years have public sector had better pensions and the pay has always been lower than for comparable job in private sector.

Public sector definitely have better pensions than private sector! Have experience of both (and my private sector pension is on the better end), and the public sector is way higher for the same salary.

Erm, yes they have and still are. I’m lucky and I have a matched up to 8% in the private sector, which is the best I’ve ever had, anybody I know working in the public sector has far better than that.

When did you start work though? This doesn’t apply to workers who started public sector jobs in the past ten years.

Your public sector pension is likely long grandfathered and not available to newer workers.

I was in the public sector from 2016. The pension I had is the same available to new starters today (Civil Service Alpha). It’s still much better than any private sector equivalent.

From an economic perspective Full Employment is a bad thing .. you never want it

Ok.

To start with I was a bit confused by your question, but I think I know what you are asking.

Correct me if I am wrong, but you are saying that in an economy, there are only so many things to make or do that are profitable. So how are so many people employed?

I think this is kind of a variation of the allocation question. So imagine you are God and you decide who works where. But you want people to work in things that are profitable, that make money.

So imagine you allocate people to jobs. You a hairdresser, you a farmer, you a tailor. Then you set the economy going.

The hairdresser works out a price list. Her prices are really high and no-one wants to get their hair cut. She has a few options - drop her prices, do some marketing to persuade people to buy them, worst case change job.

She has quite low costs for each haircut, if she is a mobile hairdresser then her main costs are her time. So the price she can charge directly relates to how much per hour she is paid.

So her business might or might not be profitable depending on how much she chooses to pay herself out of it. If she pays herself all the money the business brings in then it's not profitable at all - but she might be earning lots.

If she can't charge enough for a haircut it to cover her costs

We will have to agree to disagree on that.

OK, show me the private sector pension that gives more than that

I'm in the public sector since 2017. My employer contributes 18% to my pension.
The private sector standard is 3%.

Pay is higher in the private sector at the higher end but lower at the bottom. Minimum wage with no extras is standard in many private sector jobs.

Public sector workers are more likely to be on the "living wage" and get more holiday, better sick pay and maternity pay.

We'll have to agree to differ then. My DH and DD both work in hospitality. Hours and pay rates that I doubt would be tolerated in the public sector. Same with pensions.

I work in the voluntary sector. Lots of shite pay and pensions there too.

Ok which pay band & Contribution rate are you using as a comparator?

And have you offset the difference of a private sector employee banking their extra pay & bonuses into a private pension?

Yes, there is shit pay for nonprofessional entry level jobs across the board.

After you adjust average pay for qualification, job level, age, experience and sex a public sector worker earns less than a private sector worker in the same job.

That is because public sector workers are more likely to have degrees and/or professional qualifications. The contribution by employer isn’t towards your future pension but towards current pensioners because public sector pensions are unfunded.

Companies often could pay better wages but the law in the UK says they have to prioritise shareholder dividends above anything else. Plus the bosses are often on huge pay while low paid employees claim benefits.

This could be changed if the political will was there to legislate for fairer division of profits.

Your idea of giving everyone full employment regardless of need sounds more like a communist system.

In a capitalist society people need money so they find something to do to earn that money. Other people have money so will pay for that service or item. So for example a hairdresser can meet demand for haircuts and the price will settle at somewhere that takes into account how much it costs to run the service, how much competition there is, how much people are willing to pay. If the job doesn't pay the hairdresser finds other work of some kind.

Most people who are unemployed in the UK are not in that position because of a lack of available work, it's because either they live in the wrong area, don't have the right training or have other issues making things difficult for them. Maybe they are disabled or have young children and are restricted by times they can work. Maybe they are stuck in a benefits trap. Maybe public transport isn't adequate to get them to work.

Alpha - £56,001 - £150,000 so employee contribution of 7.34% and employer of 28.97% to get a CPI-linked pension of 2.32% pensionable earnings at NPA for each year worked.

Have not included additional pay and bonuses because that’s not about the pension, that’s about the private / public sector choice in general. (And it’s not always the case that private sector gets additional pay and bonuses anyway…)

My point is someone on, say, £60k in the public sector will get a better pension than someone on £60k in the private sector

No it's not, I'm talking about low end public sector like bin men, dinner ladies, etc. These get better pay than private sector equivalents. At the top end the public sector pay is worse.

My employer contribution is to my own pension. I get a statement each year telling me how much it's worth.