4 ms·

A non-incarcerated person has agency. They have a choice of what work to do, where that work takes place, when to work, the ability to negotiate wages, etc.

by nrb 8y ago

pmiller2 8y ago
Not being independently wealthy, I don’t have a choice to work or not. In that sense, if I wanted not to work, then, yes, I would be working against my will. See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_slavery https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_slavery Edit: I should clarify, I have the choice not to work and be homeless, but that’s such a deplorable choice, it doesn’t constitute a real, free choice.
- nrb 8y ago
  Sure you do have a choice; you can go live in the wilderness and live entirely self-sufficiently. Just because a choice is unreasonable to you doesn't make it less of a choice. More importantly (and my entire point) is that you have a choice of exactly what kind of work you want to do. That self-determination differentiates you from a prisoner or slave.
  - pmiller2 8y ago
    You’re really reaching here. Who’s to say I have the skills to do that? Where do I get the basic supplies to do so, without working for money? And on whose land do I do it? What do I do when I need medical care? What if I already have a chronic illness that needs periodic attention (as, in fact, I do.) You’re telling me that going off into the woods to die is a viable alternative to working a job for money to live in an apartment and be able to go to doctors? My point is that I have no choice other than to do something someone else will pay me to do. You haven’t addressed the argument; you are begging the question. “Work or die” sounds a lot like slavery to me. Please reply again when you have a good faith argument.
    - nrb 8y ago
      I responded with an extreme example because of your extreme conflation of "needing to do some type of work of your choosing" with wage slavery. You seem to be ignoring the central point that you GET TO CHOOSE THAT WORK.
      - pmiller2 8y ago
        You said I get to choose exactly what type of work I want to do. That’s like saying I can choose to be executed by the gas chamber or lethal injection. The consequences of not working, as someone who is not independently wealthy are so extreme as to make that not a valid choice. You are still begging the question. Do I get to choose not to work, or not? “Just go off and die,” on the streets or in the wilderness is not a valid choice.
  - jklinger410 8y ago
    There seems to be a huge break in the "it's unreasonable to do x therefore" in this argument, and many in American society. If the prisoners who didn't work were next to starving, and sleeping on the ground, you would sure have someone come in asserting that they are "forced" to work. Because they are OSTENSIBLY being forced to work by the choices they are offered. This type of pedantry goes beyond semantics and into deeper meaning that is very hard to communicate.

A non-incarcerated person has agency. They have a choice of what work to do, where that work takes place, when to work, the ability to negotiate wages, etc.

by nrb 8y ago

A non-incarcerated person has agency. They have a choice of what work to do, where that work takes place, when to work, the ability to negotiate wages, etc.

pmiller2 8y ago

Not being independently wealthy, I don’t have a choice to work or not. In that sense, if I wanted not to work, then, yes, I would be working against my will. See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_slavery https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_slavery Edit: I should clarify, I have the choice not to work and be homeless, but that’s such a deplorable choice, it doesn’t constitute a real, free choice.

nrb 8y ago
Sure you do have a choice; you can go live in the wilderness and live entirely self-sufficiently. Just because a choice is unreasonable to you doesn't make it less of a choice. More importantly (and my entire point) is that you have a choice of exactly what kind of work you want to do. That self-determination differentiates you from a prisoner or slave.
- pmiller2 8y ago
  You’re really reaching here. Who’s to say I have the skills to do that? Where do I get the basic supplies to do so, without working for money? And on whose land do I do it? What do I do when I need medical care? What if I already have a chronic illness that needs periodic attention (as, in fact, I do.) You’re telling me that going off into the woods to die is a viable alternative to working a job for money to live in an apartment and be able to go to doctors? My point is that I have no choice other than to do something someone else will pay me to do. You haven’t addressed the argument; you are begging the question. “Work or die” sounds a lot like slavery to me. Please reply again when you have a good faith argument.
  - nrb 8y ago
    I responded with an extreme example because of your extreme conflation of "needing to do some type of work of your choosing" with wage slavery. You seem to be ignoring the central point that you GET TO CHOOSE THAT WORK.
    - pmiller2 8y ago
      You said I get to choose exactly what type of work I want to do. That’s like saying I can choose to be executed by the gas chamber or lethal injection. The consequences of not working, as someone who is not independently wealthy are so extreme as to make that not a valid choice. You are still begging the question. Do I get to choose not to work, or not? “Just go off and die,” on the streets or in the wilderness is not a valid choice.
- jklinger410 8y ago
  There seems to be a huge break in the "it's unreasonable to do x therefore" in this argument, and many in American society. If the prisoners who didn't work were next to starving, and sleeping on the ground, you would sure have someone come in asserting that they are "forced" to work. Because they are OSTENSIBLY being forced to work by the choices they are offered. This type of pedantry goes beyond semantics and into deeper meaning that is very hard to communicate.