3 ms·
I'm sure it's defensible. In a free country you can defend anything you want. But it certainly seems unfair because it makes a feedback loop that keeps people
by saint_fiasco 11y ago
I'm sure it's defensible. In a free country you can defend anything you want.
But it certainly seems unfair because it makes a feedback loop that keeps people who are in most need of jobs from getting those jobs, even in the hypothetical case where they are more cheap, more competent, or at least less incompetent than they are cheap.
- HillaryBriss 11y agoThen it looks like the components of proper job allocation are competency and need, subject to whatever regulations (if any) a democratically elected government imposes. It's not hard to imagine situations where someone who is the most competent person for a job would not get the job because someone who needs the job more should get it. And, come to think of it, the government would probably be involved in the definition of "need" too. So that's a new regulation I guess. Elected lawmakers would be subjected to the will of the voters on that issue too.