Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by AnthonyMouse 23 days ago
> As far as I can see from the text above, you feel it should be relevant to their pay, but nothing you say makes me think that it currently is relevant to their pay.

No, it currently is relevant to their pay. They would be paid a different amount if the quality of their product was attributable by the customer to the specific producer. It affects how many customers/sales they get.

> You appear to agree that the labour supplier in this specific case wants attribution, and yet you are arguing that they should not get it?

But how is that any different than any other case? If the farmer wants attribution, that doesn't mean Walmart is giving it to them.
1 comments
lelanthran 23 days ago
> They would be paid a different amount if the quality of their product was attributable by the customer to the specific producer.

You are proposing a hypothetical; that is not what is currently happening.

link
AnthonyMouse 23 days ago
The thing that isn't currently happening is the stores attributing the source of their produce. It's obviously not a hypothetical that customers have preferences between different sources when they're actually provided with that information, or those preferences affect the sales of each supplier.
link
lelanthran 22 days ago
> It's obviously not a hypothetical that customers have preferences between different sources when they're actually provided with that information, or those preferences affect the sales of each supplier.

I suppose we have to agree to disagree: I see no evidence of the specific claim of yours that customers have a preference for specific individuals picking fruit (or whatever).

A specific brand? Sure. A specific niche (free-range, whatever), sure. A specific individuals labour? Yeah, I'd need to see some evidence for that!

link