What could produce such an effect? I do not have a systematic typology about this, that’s why I asked following your previous post on the subject. But I think of one possibility related to forced cartelization. Here’s the proposal. Whenever a business can succeed in obtaining a monopoly price (thanks to interventionism), it implies a restriction of production, that is, a lower demand for the relevant factors of production, labor included. The displaced labor will try to enter the market elsewhere, diminishing wages there, so that the first depressing effect will spread beyond the first point of impact.

The other side of the same coin is that those who buy to the priviledged firm spend more on its product (the demand is inelastic on the relevant range, or there could not be a monopoly price in the first place). As a consequence, they spend less on other products and services. Again, it implies a lower demand for labor here, and a higher supply there.

And the more the economy is cartelized by force, the easier it is to get monopoly prices with this effect.

Other suggestions?

But I don’t see how the “oligopsony” conditions thus created could be sufficient to reduce systematically and specifically wages, if this is what you mean when you speak of “wage slavery”. By the way, this problem of oligopsony sounds quite neoclassical to me and not austrian, (and the Wiki link confirms this impression I think)

As long as we don’t have a compulsory monopsony, as we would have under a government prohibiting to everyone except itself to be an employer, or maximum wages laws, I don’t see how an employer trying to pay an employee below its marginal productivity could be protected against the bidding of another employer.

But this really puts it into a great perspective.

Oh and welcome back to the interweb… ;)