4 ms·
You could make a similar argument for taxes. The state provides a stable environment, covers risk, and handles overhead. Yet people (in some countries, at least
by chimprich 11y ago
You could make a similar argument for taxes. The state provides a stable environment, covers risk, and handles overhead. Yet people (in some countries, at least) are significantly more accepting of corporations taking many times the value they are creating in profit versus the state taking a proportion of their earnings in taxes.
- balfirevic 11y agoThat's because their relationship with employer is voluntary.
- turar 11y agoSame is true for vast majority of countries.
- chimprich 11y agoOnly up to a point; unless you are rich you are in effect required to take a job in most countries, and there is often not any choice available in employment. Compare that to the state where the relationship is not optional but you do get a vote in how it is run. Plus you potentially have the option of moving to another country.
- sokoloff 11y agoYou have a choice of many different employers and you have the choice to form your own venture (be it software development, business consulting, running a restaurant, doing landscaping, driving Uber, or even walking dogs and doing general errands). I'm not aware of countries where your choice is "do this one specific job for this one specific employer or else starve".
- chimprich 11y agoYou may in theory have a choice of employers but in practice you may not. I'm an experienced programmer and have a fairly wide choice of jobs I might take up but in the past I have literally had to take whatever job was available. Starting your own venture may be possible but is dependent on aptitude, access to capital and the state of the economy (it's unlikely that we could all start our own businesses for example; the market wouldn't support it). The recent rise in economic migrants suggest that it many cases it really is easier to switch countries than switch jobs in one's own country.