3 ms·

I'm sure they expect it to be miserable, but expecting a miserable job and being happy about it needn't align. They might not have the necessary skills to be em

I'm sure they expect it to be miserable, but expecting a miserable job and being happy about it needn't align. They might not have the necessary skills to be employable in not-miserable work, and might not have the necessary means or time to acquire those skills. What it ultimately comes down to, I think, is: we have enough wealth as a society that if we wanted to, we could allocate resources and labor in such a way that nobody (even unskilled workers) would have to do work that miserable, at that pace, for that low compensation. But it's not an emergent property of the market, and we'd have to sacrifice some economic growth, and some payout for people higher up the ladder, to do it. We have to collectively decide whether that tradeoff is worth it, and these folks (understandably) are arguing that it is, and asking the rest of us to have some empathy.

reroute1 7y ago
OK but I'm saying I wasn't miserable and it was a better job than working retail to me. I agree it would be great to divide resources and labor in a more intelligent way I'm very open to ideas, but for now the reality is that some jobs are shitty and some are far better. And all the perks and benefits tend to come through hard to attain and coveted jobs. In my opinion you can't just create a system of equality, true equality will never exist. So why not just let it play out naturally? Drawing a line and effectively taking from people higher up is an astonishingly difficult line to draw and the overhead from a change like that could be devastating in itself, especially considering how Govt's are run in general.
malandrew 7y ago
> We have to collectively decide whether that tradeoff is worth it We do exactly that every day. Price discovery in the market is the result of collective actions that determine if a tradeoff is worth it.
- apendleton 7y ago
  This would be true if all consumers were rational actors and thought through the labor market ramifications of each purchase they made before they made it, but they're not and they don't.

reroute1 7y ago

OK but I'm saying I wasn't miserable and it was a better job than working retail to me. I agree it would be great to divide resources and labor in a more intelligent way I'm very open to ideas, but for now the reality is that some jobs are shitty and some are far better. And all the perks and benefits tend to come through hard to attain and coveted jobs. In my opinion you can't just create a system of equality, true equality will never exist. So why not just let it play out naturally? Drawing a line and effectively taking from people higher up is an astonishingly difficult line to draw and the overhead from a change like that could be devastating in itself, especially considering how Govt's are run in general.

malandrew 7y ago

> We have to collectively decide whether that tradeoff is worth it We do exactly that every day. Price discovery in the market is the result of collective actions that determine if a tradeoff is worth it.

apendleton 7y ago
This would be true if all consumers were rational actors and thought through the labor market ramifications of each purchase they made before they made it, but they're not and they don't.