3 ms·
> And yet, if we did that to such an extent that most people couldn't work those jobs with those policies, would not society be better off as a whole? Your att
by Merad 11y ago
> And yet, if we did that to such an extent that most people couldn't work those jobs with those policies, would not society be better off as a whole?
Your attitude isn't just out of touch with reality, it's somewhere between 'callous and unsympathetic' and 'sociopathic.'
Roughly 95% of the people who work in crappy low-wage jobs like fast food or call centers already hate their jobs. They already hate what their employers tell them they have to do. They aren't there because they love cold calling strangers or asking you to upgrade your meal by 1000 calories, they're there because they need a paycheck and have little other alternative.
I can only speak from personal experience regarding call centers, but I imagine fast food isn't very different. Most people absolutely do get out of those jobs as fast as they can. In the call center I worked at, average tenure was 6 months if not less (that's exactly how long I lasted, FWIW). And you know what? Every time a person walks out the door, someone else walks in to take their place, because the world has no shortage of desperate people.
Taking the stance of 'we should torture these people as much as possible because we don't have access to their employers' is bad enough, but to smugly claim that it's really for their own good and the good of society is frankly disturbing.
- Lawtonfogle 11y ago>Your attitude isn't just out of touch with reality, it's somewhere between 'callous and unsympathetic' and 'sociopathic.' As is needed of any soldier killing a guy who doesn't want to be there just as much as they don't. Probably the most sociopathic thing I did today was I just ate a Butterfingers candy bar, made by Nestle, and thus likely involved child slavery, which I funded by buying the candy bar. But I do think my informed apathy is a step up from ignorant bliss. >Roughly 95% of the people who work in crappy low-wage jobs like fast food or call centers already hate their jobs. They already hate what their employers tell them they have to do. They aren't there because they love cold calling strangers or asking you to upgrade your meal by 1000 calories, they're there because they need a paycheck and have little other alternative. And if their work isn't a net harm for me, I'll try try to make their day more pleasant. But when I'm at the local cell store again because another family member was lied to about their contract, or when you just interrupted my concentration while solving some problem to try to get me to sign up for some service that will be near impossible to cancel and which comes with more fine print than my employment contract, then I am not going to excuse you just because you did such for money. >Taking the stance of 'we should torture these people as much as possible because we don't have access to their employers' is bad enough, but to smugly claim that it's really for their own good and the good of society is frankly disturbing. >torture I found the bug.
- zaccus 11y agoWhat do you do for a living, and how is it making the world a better place?
- Lawtonfogle 11y agoSoftware to aid the following: Environmental protection. Benefit should be obvious. Reducing drunk driving. Ditto. Insurance (not the kind that would be better off replaced by single payer). Probably the least obvious as it is closest of the three to rent seeking, but the benefit is spreading risk of the incidents insured. Perhaps not as ideal as a fully socialized government system, but this isn't one of the insurance fields that is in direct competition with single payer. Do you want a list of my non-work related contributions to society as well?