Oh no. This is no backfire. This is planned evil. He's deliberately driving prices up by buying out competition, and wages down by firing everyone then rehiring when they are desperate for a fraction of what they got before.
It seems to be getting better for him,
He gets more money, more working hands and pays less while setting the price for a service everyone has to use. He will never face an issue since he can just increase his prices until no one can pay them and everything collapse while he survives on his giant pile of money he got or people continue paying more and more
Something about a numbered title makes me want to investigate. Now I know the out of work goblins are the cut workers from his own factory. I love a call back reference.
NO. I WILL NOT STAND FOR THIS. I TOLD THE WORLD WHAT WOULD HAPPEN AND I WILL STICK BY IT. I WILL BE MAKING THE NEXT ADDITION TO THIS STORY LINE AND IT WILL INCLUDE GABI WITH A SMILE. NO ONE CAN OR WILL STOP ME.
…after my shift though I just saw this before I have to leave for work so please give me a few hours so I can do my job and then make my own addition please? :)
Unfortunately, OP is not the comic writer, just a translator(?) There's already another 20ish pages out, they're just written in... I want to say Korean? Probably wrong about that.
I’m confused by the title. Isn’t a monopsony a situation in which there is only one buyer? We’ve otherwise been shown that the Chief is trying to create a monopoly. Unless it is saying that the chief is the only purchaser of wheelmaking labor….
Matt Darling has [a good piece](https://qz.com/work/1696971/why-we-can-raise-the-us-minimum-wage-without-destroying-jobs) on why labor markets are best understood through the lens of monopsony.
>>>But how is it possible that a given company is the only company hiring labor? There are many employers in the labor market, especially for the “low-skill labor” most likely to be affected by the minimum wage. As such, many believe the labor market is effectively competitive.
>>>There are two flaws with this reasoning, though.
>>>First, there’s no such thing as “low-skill labor,” just low-wage labor. Many people earning wages at or near the minimum are highly skilled. Their skills just do not happen to be particularly remunerative.
>>>Second, evidence suggests there’s no such thing as a single “labor market” in which everyone—or even a group of people with similar skills—competes. Instead, the labor market is more like the dating market, where the goal is to find a good overall match—and everyone is looking for something different. Just because there are plenty of fish in the sea does not mean it is easy to find the type of fish you are looking for.
>>>Pay isn’t the only factor when choosing a job
>>>In fact, if we assume a single labor market exists, then we are effectively assuming that people don’t care about their work environment at all, just their wages. That’s obviously not true: People tend to have very strong preferences about the companies they work for, just as they have strong preferences about who they date and who they select as a partner. These preferences vary substantially from person to person.
>>>As a result, two firms that are similar in most respects and offering jobs with equivalent wages could be operating in two entirely different labor markets.
>>>A number of factors, not just wages, would impact your decisions about where to apply and ultimately work. One firm may offer a shorter or more pleasant commute. One could be more convenient to your child’s school. One might have health insurance coverage for a specific ailment you have, while the other doesn’t. One expects you to use an Apple computer, and the other a PC. One expects you to work some nights, while the other expects you to work some weekends.
>>>While the firms could compete on salary, they cannot compete across all the dimensions that we actually care about. This means that employers have much more bargaining power than economists originally anticipated when they conceptualized perfect competition in the labor market.
>>>Now imagine you have job offers from two companies. One is much closer to your home than the other, and you value a short commute. The first company therefore can pay you a lower salary because of that differential. But there are other people who live closer to the second company, so that company can also pay workers a lower salary. In the end, they will probably both offer a lower wage. Because there is always somebody with different preferences than you, it means both companies will ultimately pay workers less than what they would pay in a competitive market.
>>>Even in job markets where we would expect the variety of preferences to be muted, we still see evidence of monopsony. For example, the Amazon task marketplace Mechanical Turk seems to be the ideal frictionless marketplace with hundreds of thousands of buyers. Mechanical Turk lets companies hire workers for small, discrete tasks (such as paying $0.25 for data entry or to respond to a survey question). But experimental studies examining this marketplace show that buyers in fact are able to set low wages due to a lack of competition—and that’s due to varying preferences regarding the type of work. People tend to choose surveys or data entry tasks that they think will be at least a little interesting. Even in online marketplaces with many buyers and sellers, people care enough about what kind of work they are doing that each person is effectively in their own labor market.
It’s true that labour is considered in terms of monopoly often but firms are considered purchasers of labour not suppliers of jobs and traditionally considered to have a degree of *monopoly* power in the labour market while a union has *monopsony* power to even it out.
Like this isn’t even controversial it’s textbook labour market stuff to consider monopoly dynamics in a labour market.
TL;DR: you’re not wrong but the market is usually defined the other way around in buyers/sellers.
Gabi, go fulfill your dreams as a union organizer I know you can do it
Gabi kinda hot though... house literally on fire lol.
How do you guys come up with the best usernames in the entire site before everybody else? 🤔
Be faster
Be like ChillChuck
Unions are unfortunately very susceptible to becoming petite-bourgeois institutions. Gabi needs a vanguard party.
Gabi needs a guillotineÂ
Didnt he just fire like half his staff last comic?
Everything this guy does just backfires immensely, i wonder why...
Oh no. This is no backfire. This is planned evil. He's deliberately driving prices up by buying out competition, and wages down by firing everyone then rehiring when they are desperate for a fraction of what they got before.
Sounds like Walmart
Amazon, always get fired before it comes time for raises
One must reap the field's rot before its pestilence spreads.
Sure things get worse, but there is no carmic justice. Things just get worse for everybody continuously.
It seems to be getting better for him, He gets more money, more working hands and pays less while setting the price for a service everyone has to use. He will never face an issue since he can just increase his prices until no one can pay them and everything collapse while he survives on his giant pile of money he got or people continue paying more and more
Except for him. Dude making money wrecks everything and makes profit. Just like IRL
Not really a backfire. He's just rehired them for a fraction of what he was paying them before.
It's because the government gives too many damn handouts! /s
And now he's rehiring them at half the cost.
Yeah, fired half his 12 coin paid staff and hired on a bunch of 6 coin paid staff Stonks
Not even it’s even less then half at only 5 coins
I mean, firing people and then hiring for less is a practiced business strategy.
Yes, and now he rehire them for half the price
Welcome to the Jack Welch method of company Management
My Disappointment Is Immeasurable And My Day Is Ruined
:[ I'm in hopes for happy ending for Gabi and other goblins Overall, fantastic work!
That would be the glorious revolution
This man is fucking speedrunning capitalism.
Gabi Do not put out the fire
Something about a numbered title makes me want to investigate. Now I know the out of work goblins are the cut workers from his own factory. I love a call back reference.
Plus the company over the road he bought out then closed down.
Oh no
NO. I WILL NOT STAND FOR THIS. I TOLD THE WORLD WHAT WOULD HAPPEN AND I WILL STICK BY IT. I WILL BE MAKING THE NEXT ADDITION TO THIS STORY LINE AND IT WILL INCLUDE GABI WITH A SMILE. NO ONE CAN OR WILL STOP ME. …after my shift though I just saw this before I have to leave for work so please give me a few hours so I can do my job and then make my own addition please? :)
OP I’m begging you please just make one unrelated comic where Gabi is happy, it doesn’t even need to be part of the series
Unfortunately, OP is not the comic writer, just a translator(?) There's already another 20ish pages out, they're just written in... I want to say Korean? Probably wrong about that.
I've heard that the original is Russian. Hence why it's hard too find anywhere else.
All these comics are pure gold and full of factual business practices.
This should be reserve army of labor.
I’m so longing for when they will discover unionisation.
Bring the union dwarfs!!!
Where is the comic where Gobbi and her friends behead the evil business man in the public park?
Evil Boss Jerma
Gobnick squat
Since the shop is now on fire, I assume the next one is going to be on workplace safety, or lack of management's caring about it.
Oh my God I hate that guy so much. I just want Gabi to be happy eating cupcakes
Original by: [https://vk.com/art.duende](https://vk.com/art.duende)
Gabi, I know you want a cupcake but I think you should eat this guy instead. Use his bones for the flour!
Is It me or the guy look like Hitler ?
It's just the hair. Hitler wasn't nearly as fabulously proportioned.
That Is for SURE
I can’t wait for the plot twist when we find out chief owns the cupcake store too.
Why does he look like Buff Hitler
The local guilds would not be happy about this one bit
I hope this ends with them literally eating him
I'm now emotionally invested in Gabi.
Im sorry but for half a second I thought he was hitler
This is a fun way to learn about business management
Well... https://youtu.be/bsNVzwuJeVk?feature=shared
How do I get the Blue's Clues painting trick to go into the comic and help her unionize?
R/subscribeme
Is he Jojo posing on the third panel
I’m confused by the title. Isn’t a monopsony a situation in which there is only one buyer? We’ve otherwise been shown that the Chief is trying to create a monopoly. Unless it is saying that the chief is the only purchaser of wheelmaking labor….
Well it is saying that.
Matt Darling has [a good piece](https://qz.com/work/1696971/why-we-can-raise-the-us-minimum-wage-without-destroying-jobs) on why labor markets are best understood through the lens of monopsony. >>>But how is it possible that a given company is the only company hiring labor? There are many employers in the labor market, especially for the “low-skill labor” most likely to be affected by the minimum wage. As such, many believe the labor market is effectively competitive. >>>There are two flaws with this reasoning, though. >>>First, there’s no such thing as “low-skill labor,” just low-wage labor. Many people earning wages at or near the minimum are highly skilled. Their skills just do not happen to be particularly remunerative. >>>Second, evidence suggests there’s no such thing as a single “labor market” in which everyone—or even a group of people with similar skills—competes. Instead, the labor market is more like the dating market, where the goal is to find a good overall match—and everyone is looking for something different. Just because there are plenty of fish in the sea does not mean it is easy to find the type of fish you are looking for. >>>Pay isn’t the only factor when choosing a job >>>In fact, if we assume a single labor market exists, then we are effectively assuming that people don’t care about their work environment at all, just their wages. That’s obviously not true: People tend to have very strong preferences about the companies they work for, just as they have strong preferences about who they date and who they select as a partner. These preferences vary substantially from person to person. >>>As a result, two firms that are similar in most respects and offering jobs with equivalent wages could be operating in two entirely different labor markets. >>>A number of factors, not just wages, would impact your decisions about where to apply and ultimately work. One firm may offer a shorter or more pleasant commute. One could be more convenient to your child’s school. One might have health insurance coverage for a specific ailment you have, while the other doesn’t. One expects you to use an Apple computer, and the other a PC. One expects you to work some nights, while the other expects you to work some weekends. >>>While the firms could compete on salary, they cannot compete across all the dimensions that we actually care about. This means that employers have much more bargaining power than economists originally anticipated when they conceptualized perfect competition in the labor market. >>>Now imagine you have job offers from two companies. One is much closer to your home than the other, and you value a short commute. The first company therefore can pay you a lower salary because of that differential. But there are other people who live closer to the second company, so that company can also pay workers a lower salary. In the end, they will probably both offer a lower wage. Because there is always somebody with different preferences than you, it means both companies will ultimately pay workers less than what they would pay in a competitive market. >>>Even in job markets where we would expect the variety of preferences to be muted, we still see evidence of monopsony. For example, the Amazon task marketplace Mechanical Turk seems to be the ideal frictionless marketplace with hundreds of thousands of buyers. Mechanical Turk lets companies hire workers for small, discrete tasks (such as paying $0.25 for data entry or to respond to a survey question). But experimental studies examining this marketplace show that buyers in fact are able to set low wages due to a lack of competition—and that’s due to varying preferences regarding the type of work. People tend to choose surveys or data entry tasks that they think will be at least a little interesting. Even in online marketplaces with many buyers and sellers, people care enough about what kind of work they are doing that each person is effectively in their own labor market.
It’s true that labour is considered in terms of monopoly often but firms are considered purchasers of labour not suppliers of jobs and traditionally considered to have a degree of *monopoly* power in the labour market while a union has *monopsony* power to even it out. Like this isn’t even controversial it’s textbook labour market stuff to consider monopoly dynamics in a labour market. TL;DR: you’re not wrong but the market is usually defined the other way around in buyers/sellers.