4 ms·

Ah, "morality" about one's job. The luxury of hacker news commenters. Very, very, very few people have that luxury. Everyone else has mouths to feed and a roof

Ah, "morality" about one's job. The luxury of hacker news commenters. Very, very, very few people have that luxury. Everyone else has mouths to feed and a roof to replace. Everyone is aware of the risks of smoking. People still want to do it. So people can, and should, produce cigarettes. If you don't like it, don't buy them. But to suggest minimum wage earners working at Marlboro should quit because of some vague "morality" is insane and extremely elitist.

adjkant 8y ago
I specifically included, very deliberately, phrasing specifying that this applies only to those that have alternatives. The reality is that many of those working at Facebook have such a luxury. I absolutely do not blame people that are working to survive. > But to suggest minimum wage earners working at Marlboro should quit because of some vague "morality" is insane and extremely elitist. Not once did I say this anywhere. There are still high ups at Marbolo that did have the ability though, and plenty of people between minimum wage survival and top level execs. It's a spectrum of both power and responsibility.
- matchbok 8y ago
  Many work at FB have that luxury? How can you prove that? You can't. That's a judgement call on your part, and a bad one at that. You have absolutely no insight into the work/life issues those workers need to consider. Someone's salary is not a measure to use when attacking them for not resigning. There is no valid argument to support the claim that Marlboro executives should resign because cigarettes are unhealthy. People resigning does exactly nothing to the market demand for cigarettes.
  - adjkant 8y ago
    > Many work at FB have that luxury? How can you prove that? You can't. > Someone's salary is not a measure to use when attacking them for not resigning. You don't resign out of the blue, you start looking and interviewing at other places. People with the talent or resume to get hired at Facebook currently do have that ability and should be valued on the current job market. > That's a judgement call on your part, and a bad one at that. You have absolutely no insight into the work/life issues those workers need to consider. Okay, so you're just boiling this down to "my judgement is better than yours without evidence" then? If no person can have any insight into anyone ever, how would we ever act on any information or situation? Assumptions and judgements must not be made blindly but they do need to be made in an informed manner. Why you discount my perspective on them without reason is another matter. > There is no valid argument to support the claim that Marlboro executives should resign because cigarettes are unhealthy. People resigning does exactly nothing to the market demand for cigarettes. They literally created the market demand through their suppression of information. The argument is not at all "cigarettes are unhealthy", it's that they should not be marketed and supported in the motives of profit above morality. Please stop rephrasing my arguments to fit your assumptions. I'd love to have a real discussion here instead of talking past each other.

adjkant 8y ago

I specifically included, very deliberately, phrasing specifying that this applies only to those that have alternatives. The reality is that many of those working at Facebook have such a luxury. I absolutely do not blame people that are working to survive. > But to suggest minimum wage earners working at Marlboro should quit because of some vague "morality" is insane and extremely elitist. Not once did I say this anywhere. There are still high ups at Marbolo that did have the ability though, and plenty of people between minimum wage survival and top level execs. It's a spectrum of both power and responsibility.

matchbok 8y ago
Many work at FB have that luxury? How can you prove that? You can't. That's a judgement call on your part, and a bad one at that. You have absolutely no insight into the work/life issues those workers need to consider. Someone's salary is not a measure to use when attacking them for not resigning. There is no valid argument to support the claim that Marlboro executives should resign because cigarettes are unhealthy. People resigning does exactly nothing to the market demand for cigarettes.
- adjkant 8y ago
  > Many work at FB have that luxury? How can you prove that? You can't. > Someone's salary is not a measure to use when attacking them for not resigning. You don't resign out of the blue, you start looking and interviewing at other places. People with the talent or resume to get hired at Facebook currently do have that ability and should be valued on the current job market. > That's a judgement call on your part, and a bad one at that. You have absolutely no insight into the work/life issues those workers need to consider. Okay, so you're just boiling this down to "my judgement is better than yours without evidence" then? If no person can have any insight into anyone ever, how would we ever act on any information or situation? Assumptions and judgements must not be made blindly but they do need to be made in an informed manner. Why you discount my perspective on them without reason is another matter. > There is no valid argument to support the claim that Marlboro executives should resign because cigarettes are unhealthy. People resigning does exactly nothing to the market demand for cigarettes. They literally created the market demand through their suppression of information. The argument is not at all "cigarettes are unhealthy", it's that they should not be marketed and supported in the motives of profit above morality. Please stop rephrasing my arguments to fit your assumptions. I'd love to have a real discussion here instead of talking past each other.