4 ms·
I very much do not like the argument you are making, as the implication is that no employer, or indeed anyone with power, should be criticised. Society should
by noelwelsh 8y ago
I very much do not like the argument you are making, as the implication is that no employer, or indeed anyone with power, should be criticised.
Society should work for the benefit of society, not just those in a position of power. We are seeing a change in how employment works, and we (i.e. society) need to work out how to handle this change. This article is part of the debate. You should not try to shut down the debate.
- menacingly 8y agoI regret that I came across that way, because the debate is great. Criticism is important. I just think before you fight for something, you should be certain that what you're after is worth winning.
- tinbucket 8y agoIn scenarios #2 and #3 very few people are winning. I think you'd be hard-pressed to get majority support against #1, which would be more generally beneficial for society than the other two.
- menacingly 8y agoExcept that it almost by definition employs fewer people, so the people hypothetically employed by #2 may prefer it to the unemployment of #1