There are several answers, but the most important is probably that the market for labor isn’t like the market for, say, wheat, because workers are people.
This is just so obvious I can't believe that economists are just now realizing it. One of the most frustrating things about studying economics are some of the ridiculous assumptions that are made. Yes these assumptions make the math easier and sometimes lead to accurate results, but then they get ingrained as economic orthodoxy and we end up hurting real people.
Economics is a study that relies heavily on models, but they sometimes forget that the models are the map rather than the territory. I find a lot of supply side/Austrian/Chicago/whatever economics do this, divorcing the human element from their economic pronouncements.
This is just so obvious I can't believe that economists are just now realizing it. One of the most frustrating things about studying economics are some of the ridiculous assumptions that are made. Yes these assumptions make the math easier and sometimes lead to accurate results, but then they get ingrained as economic orthodoxy and we end up hurting real people.
Economics is a study that relies heavily on models, but they sometimes forget that the models are the map rather than the territory. I find a lot of supply side/Austrian/Chicago/whatever economics do this, divorcing the human element from their economic pronouncements.