3 ms·
You're right. I'm sorry. It IS exploitative. We should take away their wireless transmitters and all the money they made from donations and services, stop payin
by ChrisNorstrom 15y ago
You're right. I'm sorry. It IS exploitative. We should take away their wireless transmitters and all the money they made from donations and services, stop paying them $20/day and go back to not giving a fuck about them like we did before we read the article.
Just saying: If I was homeless, and someone paid me $20/day + all tips and donations to hold onto a wireless transmitter. I would be ecstatic.
- pessimizer 15y agoA lot of people give a fuck about the homeless, you're just projecting. They are human beings with lives, friends, and families. I'm pretty sure that they say that they would feel a certain way if they were in your position too, and it would be just as speculative.
- derleth 15y ago> They are human beings with lives, friends, and families. Which means they deserve a job that makes them feel good about themselves and nurtures them as humans beings. A lot of people with homes don't have that.
- pessimizer 15y agoI'm not sure if sub-minimum wage wandering appliance is that job.
- derleth 15y agoBegging on the street certainly isn't. The dichotomy here isn't between "Be a Wi-Fi antenna" or "Be a respectable middle-class office worker"; it's "Be a Wi-Fi antenna" or "Be a homeless person without the Wi-Fi antenna income".
- pessimizer 15y agoIf you're self-employed, you're not subject to the minimum wage laws.