A business shifting 20% of profit to more labor would

[cthulu2016]

6. I might not have been clear enough

I was just making a small point about nominal costs.

Say a company has an annual profit of 100,000.

If 20,000 of that were diverted from distribution to shareholders to labor costs the net future effect would be to cost the shareholders some amount less than 20,000.

I might be 18,000. It might be 5,000. But it wouldn't be 20,000 because every business has something to be done that would be beneficial, but is not worth hiring someone to do it.

That's all I meant. What got me thinking about it was contemplating how the cost of full employment (across society) is smaller than the cost of hiring all unemployed people since they would presumably be doing something that made their net cost some fraction of the nominal cost.