CMV: If you have worked for a wage that you believe is significantly less than what you are worth - it is partly your fault.

If you have worked for a wage which you believe is significantly less than what you are worth, then it is partly your fault. You are also to blame for your financial situation. <br><br>The meaning of "significantly less than what you are worth" needs to be clearly defined for this to make sense. If we assume that you are worth $100k, then working for $24 an hour is "significantly less" than that, but working for $50 an hour is more than your worth. <br><br>When I'm thinking partly your fault, I mean that 50% of the blame is yours, 25% is the company's, and 25% is the government's. If you could make $100k but instead make $48k working a full-time job, it is your fault that you are making $24k *less* than your worth (50% of the $48k). The company is to blame for the other $24k (25% * 2 of the $48k). I want to clarify that just because something is your fault does not mean that you are a bad person or that it is entirely your fault. Just because something is partly your fault does not make you a bad person. You can still be a victim if something is partly your fault. <br><br>Using the same numbers as above, if the company would pay an additional $24k, profits would likely go down. You working for $100k instead of $48k would result in a loss of profits for the company, which is a bad thing for the company. The company should pay an additional $24k as that would result in a gain for the company, as the company is still profiting from you despite paying you $100k - $24k = $76k. Instead, the company is paying you $48k and profiting $28k by paying you less than what you are worth. <br><br>There are two reasons why companies pay their employees less than they are worth. The first is that the employees are not worth as much as they think they are to their employer. This is easily resolved by simply looking at the data and profit reports. The second reason is that the employees do not know that they are being paid less than their worth to their employer. Clearly, employees do not know how much money they make or cost their company, because employees aren't typically allowed to see the data. But that's ok because employees don't need to know the data to know that they are being underpaid. All they need to do is realize that if they were making more money, then they would be making more money, which would be a good thing for them. Since this is a good thing for them, they should definitely realize that they are being underpaid, and thus, it is their fault that they are being paid less than what they are worth.<br><br>The second reason is easily resolvable by employees knowing that they are being underpaid. The first reason is not as easy to resolve. Employees are not worth as much to their employers as they think they are because the employees do not know how to negotiate properly and are not as valuable as they think they are. Employees are too scared to ask for pay raises because they are afraid that they will be fired. However, this is not the fault of the employees for being scared. It *is* the fault of the employees for not being valuable enough. <br><br>If the employees were smart, they would realize that they are being underpaid. If they were smart and valuable, they would realize that they are being underpaid and be able to negotiate a fairer wage with their employer. However, the only reason why employees know that they are underpaid is that they are smart, but they are not as valuable as they think. Therefore, employees should be paid more when they are smart and valuable, but employees are not valuable when they are smart. This is a paradox.<br><br>The paradox can be resolved by realizing that the value of an employee does not matter, but rather the value that an employer places on an employee matters. Instead of an employee knowing that they are underpaid because they are smart, an employee knowing that they are underpaid because they are valuable. If an employee is valuable, they will be able to negotiate a fair wage. If they are not valuable, they will not be able to negotiate a fair wage. Using this logic, we can conclude that the paradox is fake because an employee is valuable if and only if they are able to negotiate a fair wage. <br><br>If an employee is not as valuable as they think, but still think they are valuable, then it is the employee's fault that they are not as valuable as they think they are. The employer should pay the employee a fair wage, but it is the employee's fault for telling the employer that they are not as valuable as they think they are. If the employees were as valuable as they think they are, then they would be able to negotiate a fair wage and would thus not be paid less than what they are worth. Thus, the employees are paid less than what they are worth because they are not as valuable as they think they are.<br><br>So, to conclude, if you have worked for a wage that you believe is significantly less than what you are worth - it is partly your fault. The data proves that you are not as valuable as you think you are. <br><br>The only way that this could not be true is if your worth is somehow different from the value that your employer places on you. If this were true, then it would be possible for an employee to get paid more than what they are worth. For example if an employee was worth $100k to the company, but the employer thought they were worth $200k, then they would be getting paid $52 an hour. <br><br>Is this possible? If this is possible, then I am wrong. But just because it is possible, that does not mean that it actually happens. If this actually happens, then I am wrong. But just because it actually happens does not mean that you know that it actually happens. If you know that this actually happens, then I am wrong.<br><br>So, show me a way that you can know that this actually happens, and CMV.