3 ms·

I think you're missing the point--someone can choose not to share personal information with you because they've deemed it none of your business, not because the

• js8 8y ago
  Except it is my business. The whole free market and negotiations for better salaries thing relies on participants having enough information. See, it's a prisoner's dilemma type of deal (actually, it's a different game). I offer cooperation - you can either decide to deny it (by keeping your salary private) or cooperate also (by stating your salary back). If you decide to reciprocate useful information, then we might cooperate more in the future for mutual benefit. So it's useful information whether you want to get into coalition with me. I don't care the same way about your health or your porn.
  • pluto9 8y ago
    > Except it is my business. The whole free market and negotiations for better salaries thing relies on participants having enough information. > See, it's a prisoner's dilemma type of deal (actually, it's a different game). All of this is your opinion. Has it ever occurred to you that others might not see salary negotiation this way, and therefore could have other reasons for not joining your "coalition" besides cowardice? I and many others see salary negotiation differently than you do. I negotiated my salary with my employer when I started my job. That means I consider it worth my while to do the job for that amount and my employer thinks it's worth that amount to employ me. Otherwise one of us would have walked away. The fairness of my salary is independent of whether the guy next to me makes twice as much or half as much. I couldn't give two shits how much he makes. I would not "get into a coalition" with you because I would find it irritating to know that I helped you in your entirely self-interested crusade to raise your own salary in the name of "fairness" or "mutual benefit" or "fighting the man" or however you might characterize it. I also simply don't like to associate with people who use words like "coward" to describe anyone who has more of a social filter than they do (you sound like you're seventeen). You can attribute that to spite if you want, but cowardice would be quite a leap.
    • js8 8y ago
      "Has it ever occurred to you that others might not see salary negotiation this way" Yes, it totally did! That's why I am not judging them. I am afraid though you don't want to understand where I am coming from, either. I understand that people want to have their lives and don't want to fight, politically or economically. It's just good to know who they are. Frankly, I find it curious that people do not want to openly discuss salaries. It's not like the stakes are very high (in Western societies, anyway). But maybe in the U.S. they actually are higher than, say, Norway. It's almost as if collective bargaining is a taboo topic in the U.S. The word "coward" is probably not ideal, but I don't know of a better equivalent. You could take my example, and change "discussing salaries" into "discussing government" in a society which (relatively softly) represses freedom of speech (like for example, communist society in Eastern Europe, where I do come from). So in these hypothetical circumstance, you can make a certain statement, which can be interpreted as being critical of the government, which is a taboo in that society. The other people can either take the bait and break a taboo slightly too, or they might not. It's useful information for you to know whether or not they are willing to break the taboo, because if the push ever comes to shove, for example you would suddenly find yourself in some uncomfortable situation, say somebody from dissent would ask you for help, and you would need help of another person, then you would naturally choose somebody who you know was willing to break the taboo before. So that's the meaning of the word "coward" in that context. It's not being judgemental, because as I said, it would be immoral to force the people to participate (in activity that is considered bad by society and thus taboo). It's a simple test of boundaries, you want to participate or not. "The fairness of my salary is independent of whether the guy next to me makes twice as much or half as much. I couldn't give two shits how much he makes." I don't think it's quite true, because if it truly had been the case, then you wouldn't consider it taboo to discuss it. Just like, you know, we don't consider it taboo to talk about whether or not we have kids or cars and how many.