= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
army1987 comments on On the concept of "talent-constrained" organizations - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (28)
In other words, the labour market resembles an oligopsony much more than one would guess by looking at the total number of employers alone.
I think it's a point about risk aversion, not about the structure of the labour market.
I think there are multiple causes.
People are risk-averse. But even if they weren't, changes usually have transaction costs. For example if people have to move from one city to another, that costs something. Also it means that their partner could have to change their job to stay together.
If you want to make a lot of money, you have to specialize in something. That naturally reduces the number of potential employers. You can switch do doing something different, but again, there are transaction costs.
All true. And, again, all of that doesn't have much to do with whether the labour market is an oligopsony.
Seems to me that with enough specialization there are few buyers and few sellers. Which of these numbers is smaller probably depends on specific specialization, and may change over time.