|
|
|
|
|
by JohnMakin
941 days ago
|
|
Go ahead, ask someone to explain why a guy at starbucks "deserves" to be making less than a living wage, it boils down to this. There's no real argument for it. If you ask them why they shouldn't make more, they'll typically say something like "it's not meant to be a career" or some nonsense about inflation. Yet, society still needs people to pour coffee or serve fast food, so by arguing against a living wage in this manner you are actually arguing that people with menial service jobs should be poor by merit of the type of work they do. Granted that isn't a perfect 1:1 with what I said, but the attitude is definitely there. Why else would someone be so vehemently against a person making a living wage? |
|
In reality, (I assume that) the people who disagree with you don't have malice for poor people, but are seeing different levels of the economic stack. I would bet (I'll put money down) that they'd argue a mix of labor supply/demand and regulatory arguments, and that they're NOT just hoping to put down those who are economically less well-off.
It's important to actually understand your counterparties if you actually want to improve things.
EDIT give this a go https://depolarizinggpt.org/