4 ms·
> But it still means there's another job left unfilled. Then it's their fault for being less competitive employers than those other military jobs. Welcome to
by FirmwareBurner 3y ago
> But it still means there's another job left unfilled.
Then it's their fault for being less competitive employers than those other military jobs. Welcome to the free market.
You are not owed employees just because you have a job opening, you need to compete for them. If you're an unattractive employer, tough shit mate. Git gud.
- xcv123 3y agoYou are completely missing the point here.
- FirmwareBurner 3y agoPlease, arrive at the point.
- xcv123 3y agoThe other commenters here said it better than I did. Here's an explanation of the Broken Window Fallacy https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/08/broken-window-fallacy.asp https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/08/broken-window-fa...
- stale2002 3y ago> Then it's their fault Nobody said anything about fault or added any moral claims. Instead it is merely that another job is unfilled. This is an argument about economics, not anything to do with who owes who, which is completely irrelevant to the topic at hand.
- Dylan16807 3y ago> You are not owed employees That's a fine response to a person complaining that specific jobs are lacking workers. The idea that as a total statistic there are fewer normal jobs getting filled is a different thing entirely.