4 ms·
The guy working at the deli may have sold more inventory. New deli shops would have opened up, creating more jobs. Using the deli guy as a pawn for your politic
by smokeyj 8y ago
The guy working at the deli may have sold more inventory. New deli shops would have opened up, creating more jobs. Using the deli guy as a pawn for your political agenda.. not cool. Not understanding basic economics and speaking on behalf of deli-guy who probably has a solid grasp of supply and demand. Not cool.
- lancesells 8y ago"New deli shops would have opened up, creating more jobs." I don't know enough to have any opinion on whether it's a good or bad thing but I can tell you new deli's don't open up in these situations. Local businesses close and corporations open up shop. Chipotles and Pret-A-Manger's will take their place. Maybe the deli guy can work for them.
- iscrewyou 8y agoThanks. This is exactly what I was aiming for. As I read the OP's comment, I was trying to find a way to tackle it but it just seems like a moot point getting through to someone like that.
- smokeyj 8y agoBut the comment agrees with me. I'm okay with the nitpick. Chipotle still pays minimum wage and taxes. Am I supposed to be outraged by Chipotle? Or am I supposed to look down at people employed by Chipotle? It's like paradoxical wokeness where you become classist yourself and look down at people with real jobs. I'm sure many students would be happy to work for Chipotle and then work for Amazon after graduation. The local community could have spent the increase in tax revenue on providing social services. I understand you oppose the deal not out of some economic principal but from a moral principle. But even the moral principle is wrong. Taxation has been used to incentivize behavior since the inception of taxation. Turning away funds that could benefit the needy, out of a principle to help the needy? That's a head scratcher.