| > why do they get paid so little for that? What follows isn't necessarily right, but I believe It's why they're paid little. Because they're all easily replaceable, companies doesn't have to invest more than maybe a week of salary into replacing them if they ask for higher pay. At my company we're having a hard time finding people, so sometimes even questionable talent gets hired and trained because we need people. But in low-skill work people will always be paid what is regulated. If we increase their salary enough, then I wouldn't want my job, even though I enjoy what I do, because of the mental burden of never having my head to myself. The best job I've ever had was when backpacking Australia, was taking care of gardens, hedges and stairwells. It paid shit, but every day I felt gratification because I worked with my body and actually finished something (even though It had to be done again in a week or 2 since things grow like crazy in Brisbane). What I do now is an endless struggle of never being finished, so my brain keeps computing solutions to these problems even once I'm off the clock, so if a bus driver all of a sudden has my salary, why on earth would I want a job that requires more of me. As in, I'm not just the current meatbag at this place. I bet we could even stretch this into that it would reduce output of society greatly, since people that otherwise would pursue "high skill" work (Idk, somehow i feel like anyone could be taught my job in a week, but this is more Imposter Syndrome than anything i guess) could be just as happy or happier doing something that doesn't increase human efficency. I will argue for this "to death" (since It's really one of my core beliefs), but i would also love someone to be able to change my mind as it could potentially increase my mental well-being. I'm sadly looking "down" on "simple work", I think as a means to justify wtf I'm doing. > Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith. |
It also means, that given a good trade-off, you would do something else.
But a lot of people care less about money, and more about other things in life: work-life balance, mental health, closeness to family, whatever.
Given that working is a must, why wouldn't we try to make it suck less for everybody? At the end of the day, life is complicated enough without having other people trying to make it harder for you.
It sounds like you want the other to be paid less, since you are having a hard time. The solution IMO is not paying other people less, it is finding a better place for yourself!
> I bet we could even stretch this into that it would reduce output of society greatly, since people that otherwise would pursue "high skill" work
As you can imagine, I disagree - I like my job (not position! I like it as well, but I could change it), and I wouldn't do any other job for the same amount of money. I like not being dead tired at the end of the day, I like being challenged, I like being able to deliver something to millions of people.
Unwanted suggestion: focus less on other people, and a bit more on your own well-being.
Edit: I have also to disclose, I wouldn't mind a 20% tax increase if this means bus drivers and nurses are paid more: we don't do anything special, I really don't understand why we should be paid 3x what other people are making. I understand the _mechanism_ behind it, but at the end of the week my SO does much more work than me, and she's paid 1/3.