4 ms·
> Low level cruise employees like the cleaning crew, cabin stewards, waiters, cooks, etc. are paid ridiculously low wages, because cruise ships are registered t
by chimeracoder 13y ago
> Low level cruise employees like the cleaning crew, cabin stewards, waiters, cooks, etc. are paid ridiculously low wages, because cruise ships are registered to countries like Panama and the companies do not need to adhere to U.S. standards.
On most major lines, the cleaning, etc. staff get reprimanded if they receive reviews from their passengers that are less than 5 stars. Even if it's only 4/5 (or the equivalent), they are expected to keep "perfect" ratings and are punished if they don't.
Cruises end up being a convenient way for my family to take vacations for a number of reasons (not the least being that my grandmother has limited mobility and cannot enjoy other vacation destinations as easily), but I always feel very guilty every time I go, because I see firsthand how badly the staff are exploited.
(Also, if you never want to go on a cruise line again, read the chapter in Tina Fey's "Bossypants" about her experience the one and only time she took a cruise.)
As for the (lack of) connectivity, I actually like this feature. When I go on a vacation, I enjoy being completely disconnected from the "real world". I find that, after a week of this, I wind up completely refreshed and come back to work more productive than if my attention had been split. But YMMV.
- crusso 13y agobut I always feel very guilty every time I go, because I see firsthand how badly the staff are exploited You have to consider any situation holistically. What you call exploitation is often a tremendous improvement over the alternatives those folks have in their countries of origin. Go on the cruise, tip well, and be polite to staff.
- e12e 13y ago> You have to consider any situation holistically. What you call exploitation is often a tremendous improvement over the alternatives those folks have in their countries of origin. To consider the situation holistically would mean to look at the global system of capitalism bootstrapped by years of outright colonization and exploitation that lead to the situation where doing low-skilled manual labour is considered an improvement in lifestyle for otherwise healthy and able individuals -- rather than (say) getting free, high-quality education or vocational training and a reasonable share of the improvements in life style industrialization and science have enabled. I'm not buying into the idea that not going on a cruise would improve things, and I'm not even saying don't go on cruises -- but why delude yourself that exploiting people is ok, just because someone else have set the stage for doing so? It doesn't stop being exploitation just because someone comes from a worse situation than they're in now. That just makes participating in the exploitation is a rational choice by the one being exploited -- it doesn't make it a moral choice by the exploiter...
- pjlegato 13y agoThis is Armenian Radio. Caller asks us, what is difference between capitalism and socialism? We reply, under capitalism, man exploits man; under socialism, it's just the opposite.
- e12e 13y agoTrue enough. I've never considered socialism much of an alternative, but I do think both (modern) anarchism and communism holds great promise. As for the more fundamental question of "why can't we just all get along?" -- we'll just have to keep working on it...
- pjlegato 13y agoOnce, there was a peaceful anarchic village, where everybody was perfectly equal and there were no laws or rules. People shared everything freely and never fought. Then, one day, the neighboring village invaded, killed all the men, raped all the women, and enslaved all the children. That was the end of that. Even if somehow the whole world were to switch instantaneously to the state of anarchy, it would be a very short matter of time before someone internally decided to take over and enforce rules with the threat of violence. This person would then be the "government." As for Communism, Armenian radio listener calls in and says, "We are told that true Communism is just on the horizon now. I ask, what is horizon?" We reply, "Horizon is imaginary line that always recedes as you approach it." The fundamental misapprehension at work here is confusing two meanings of the word "system." There are systems created by humans, such as "the justice system of Japan." We can change those, since they derive entirely from human control. Then, there are emergent or natural systems, such as gravity. These cannot be changed simply because people decide they don't like them. Capitalism is of the latter category. It is not a human-created system; it did not emerge from colonialism. It is merely the natural emergent behavior of actors under resource scarcity. As long as there are not enough resources for everyone to have what they want, there will be some variant of a market and capitalistic trade. It is not possible to alter this scenario simply because it doesn't seem pleasant; that's wishful thinking. All that can be done is to make the market more or less efficient. The Soviet Union and North Korea, for example, have always had internal capitalist black markets, despite massive penalties. Prisons have internal black markets. Countries that try to control their currency's value have massive internal black markets for hard currency. Cocaine is readily available for a price almost everywhere in the world, despite massive and coordinated efforts to suppress that market. The reverse also applies; in the absence of actual scarcity, it is impossible to enforce a market, since that is an emergent property of scarcity rather than a human-chosen system. Illegal music and movie trading online, for example, continue to grow despite massive efforts to prop up the market, because there is no actual scarcity.