4 ms·
I find it a bit tasteless to use the term slavery or wage slavery for essentially a job that you don't like but feel compelled to do to survive when there's sti
by kriro 10y ago
I find it a bit tasteless to use the term slavery or wage slavery for essentially a job that you don't like but feel compelled to do to survive when there's still real slavery going on in the world. The outcome of disobedience is (assumed) unemployment which in most countries where this term is used doesn't even mean you starve or suffer severely. The outcome for real slaves is a bit more dramatic.
- Aaargh20318 10y ago> The outcome of disobedience is (assumed) unemployment which in most countries where this term is used doesn't even mean you starve or suffer severely. Yes it does. I live in the Netherlands, one of the most developed countries in the world and one with what is considered excellent social security. If I would 'disobey' and decide to stop working, I would get nothing at all. Zero Euros. I would be out on the streets in no time flat. If I quit my job, I would be 'at fault' for being unemployed and would not qualify for unemployment. Even if I get fired, I couldn't decide to stay unemployed. Pretty much every type of social security benefit comes with the requirement to apply for jobs (which as a Software engineer means that I'd be back in the 9-to-5 grind within days), failure to apply for jobs means no money. It has come to the point that even if you are disabled you get no social security if you have 'the capacity to work', which means that if some civil servant can dream up a job you could possibly do (regardless of if that job actually exist or if someone is hiring people for such a position), you get nothing. No arms and no legs ? Your tongue works so you could be a stamp-licker, no social security for you. Of course, if you do have a job they take a huge chunk out of your monthly salary to pay for 'social security'.