If you are following Hannah Krieg, you will recognize the return of a regressive and debunked reading about wages: When high, they are bad for business and even workers. With this logic, which makes no economic sense, we find Bruce Harrell repressing the wages of city workers, Council Member Maritza Rivera blaming Seattle Public Library’s closures on, of all things, union wages. And Chair Sara Nelsonโ€™s dramatic (if not fanatical) devotion to reducing gig workers to paupers. And just like that, we have a united front.

So this is what Seattle voted for between 2021 and 2022. This is what progressives didn’t have the guts to do? End the homeless crisis and crime with not only sweeps but also low and stagnant wages. It’s like that old Toyota jingle: “You asked for it, you got it…” And, mind you, we are still in a period of economic expansion (one doesn’t want to imagine how low Sara Nelson would go during a period of contraction). But this is the question we must now ask: Why are low wages generally bad for the economy?

Let’s put aside the fact that Council Member Maritza Rivera is an out-and-out Republican, the anti-union party, and consider the real economic consequences of low wages. High turnover, poor performance, and the transference of private costs to social costs. In short, inefficiency for profits that are, at best, ephemeral. In 1957, the Ukrainian-American economist Harvey Leibenstein introduced the concept of efficiency wages. It was first applied to developing countries but, in the 1970s and 1980s, was adopted for developing ones as well. Indeed, the neo-Keyensian (not to be confused with post-Keynesiansโ€”the former is center left; the latter, totally on the left) Carl Shapiro and Joseph Stiglitz even developed a mathematical formula for efficiency wages called Shapiroโ€“Stiglitz theory.

What are efficiency wages? The London School of Economics offers this simple description:

Main feature in efficiency wages: firms unilaterally set wages, and choose not to cut wages down to the market-clearing level, because of the detrimental effect that this would have on worker effort, motivation, recruitment, retention, and ultimately on firm profits.

This, of course, is Nick Hanauer’s position. So, this isn’t something that’s way out there and radical. High wages reduce waste, improve the lives and health of workers, and result in better products and services. So, if Seattle fulfills Chair Sara Nelson’s dream of impoverishing gig workers, it would likely worsen the homeless crisis (the social cost) and certainly result in still-expensive shitty rides and deliveries.

That’s the economics. Let’s now turn to a question that’s conveniently ignored by local business associations and their puppets in City Hall: Why is the cost of living in Seattle so high? The main reason is found in housing. An example: The majority of Seattle renters experienced sharp increases in rent “in the past 12 months.” Is City Hall looking into this? You wish. Wages are the only game in town. But imagine if we had a mayor or City Council President who cares about the real stuff. What would they find? Likely what More Perfect Union found when it examined the housing markets in Phoenix and Washington D.C.: a price-fixing company called RealPage.

ย 

RealPage is a website that lures landlords with the promise of super-profits. The company does this by, one, using confidential information, and, two, running an algorithm that “[keeps] the overall market at its highest peak.” The algorithm does not care if the increases leave an apartment building with a lot of vacancies because the rent inflation is enough to cover for the loss of occupants. This, in a word, is not a market (a myth) but a cartel, the heart and soul of capitalism.ย 

It’s hard to believe that the price manipulations orchestrated, and even policed, by RealPage are singular or exceptional or isolated. It’s hard to believe that Seattle’s rent increases are due sheerly to market forces. We are not that special.

As Gene Balk demonstrated in the post “Most Seattle-area renters report big rent hikes in the past 12 months,” the recent rent hikes are pretty uniform. Meaning, no matter where you go in this city, you are bound to run into increases that seem to have no end in sight and, more importantly, are not checked by the kind of political opposition that wages so easily face. If the market was actually competitive, you would expect to see less homogeneity and more diversity in prices. Scratch the surface of any rental market and you are bound to find variations of RealPage.

Charles Mudede—who writes about film, books, music, and his life in Rhodesia, Zimbabwe, the USA, and the UK for The Stranger—was born near a steel plant in Kwe Kwe, Zimbabwe. He has no memory...

6 replies on “Seattle Revives the Bullshit Economics of Low Wages”

  1. Price manipulation is illegal – wish progressives would focus more on legal recourse (up to and including our attorney general, who is supposed to be safeguard consumer rights, bringing some class action suits against these fโ€™ing cartels).

    I also wish we would start decommodifying housing by banning short term rentals (that alone would do more to increase housing availability than any other proposal over the next 5-10 years).

  2. The “Conservative” council is the result of having an ineffectual, ego-driven, drama-ridden council during a very difficult period for the City of Seattle and the world at large. Four years ago, the city was a mess, we were in a pandemic, there were civil disturbances almost weekly, and the former Mayor was a fool. The folly that was CHOP was the final nail in the coffin. The people wanted new leadership, and they voted accordingly.

    It’s great to advocate for liberal causes. Liberal programs are part of what makes Seattle a great city. But as a council member – and especially on a council with districts – you have to take care of business. They didn’t do that, and the chickens came home to roost.

    And I’ll just quietly murmur that I have quietly murmured this for years.

  3. If you want a bunch of unruly competitors to those mega landlords, support your local mom and pop. They rarely have access to so-call price fixing software, and are often happy to trade somewhat below market rents for a quality long term tenant.

  4. I agree in general with the article but OMG please focus on the real cause of high rent rather than distracting people. RealPage might have some minor impact but the real cause of high rents is that Seattle does not allow enough housing to be built for all the people moving here. (And for anyone thinking “Hell they’re building plenty of apartments and my rent keeps going up.” That is because all the new housing still has not kept up with the tremendous increase in Seattle’s population.) And Harrell plans through the up-for-renewal Comprehensive Plan to keep it that way. Mr. Mudede, I am a renter and I agree there’s a terrible problem with rents but please focus on what really matters.

  5. You claim to be an economist, right? Do you really think that high rents are not simply explained by operation of supply and demand on a market that is several hundred thousand units short of housing? Do you really need to look any further than that for an explanation? When we were in the building boom a few years ago and there were fliers on phone poles offering $95/hr for electricians, was that also some political conspiracy?

Comments are closed.